急诊内镜下套扎与硬化治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的比较

目的比较食管静脉曲张破裂出血急诊内镜下套扎与硬化治疗的疗效和安全性。方法对210例食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者,急诊情况下行内镜下套扎或硬化治疗,并分析比较两组急诊止血成功率、近期再出血率、急诊治疗曲张静脉消失率、不良反应、并发症、病死率等情况。结果急诊止血成功率套扎组达95.4%,硬化组达96.0%;近期再出血率分别为4.8%和4.1%;套扎组急诊治疗曲张静脉消失率明显优于硬化组（P〈0.01）。两组不良反应、并发症及病死率无差别。临床疗效与肝功能呈正相关。结论急诊内镜下套扎与硬化治疗食管静脉曲张出血均为有效、安全的止血方法。临床上可结合患者实际情况综合考虑后选择。     

急诊内镜下套扎治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血

目的 总结急诊内镜下紧急套扎治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的经验。方法 对84例食管静脉曲张破裂出血病人在急诊情况下紧急内镜下套扎，观察止血效果。结果 急诊止血成功率98.8％，术中无并发症发生，近期再出血率4.76％。结论 急诊EVI，治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血是一种安全、有效、快捷的止血方法。     

内镜套扎术急症止血治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效观察

目的探讨食管静脉曲张破裂出血的内镜套扎术急诊止血的疗效及安全性。方法对52例乙型肝炎肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者实施内镜下急诊套扎止血术,观察术中、术后并发症,并于术后1月复查胃镜观察食管曲张静脉消失情况。结果51例（98％）患者急诊止血成功,1例（2％）止血失败,表现为术后6天内反复便血,转外科手术治疗;术后1月复查胃镜见21例（41．2％）静脉曲张消失或基本消失,28例（54．9％）中上段食管静脉曲张基本消失,2例（3．9％）存在显著的静脉曲张。术后常见并发症有咽下不适、胸骨后隐痛、低至中度发热,发生率为15．9％,未发生严重的并发症。结论急诊套扎术治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血疗效可靠、安全性高。     

内镜下组织粘合剂注射联合套扎治疗食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效观察

目的评价急诊内镜下组织粘合剂（α-氰丙烯酸烷基脂）注射联合套扎治疗食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血的临床疗效。方法2008年1月至2009年1月间21例食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血患者接受急诊内镜下胃底曲张静脉组织粘合剂注射联合食管曲张静脉套扎（EVL）治疗,对其治疗疗效进行回顾性分析。结果21例患者的急诊止血有效率达95％（20／21）,未出现严重并发症。结论急诊内镜下组织粘合剂注射联合套扎治疗食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血,止血疗效确切,并发症发生率低,值得推广。     

“U型”反转套扎技术在食管胃静脉曲张治疗中的应用

目的评价“U型”反转套扎技术治疗食管胃静脉曲张的疗效。方法将191例食管胃静脉曲张患者随机分为2组：内镜下常规套扎（EVL）组101例行内镜下常规套扎;内镜下反转套扎（EVLR）组90例先行反转镜环周套扎贲门下曲张静脉,而后常规套扎食管。观察术后18个月内曲张静脉治疗效果、平均治疗次数、急诊止血率、近期再出血率及静脉曲张复发率等。结果随访期内,治疗后显效率、无效率,平均治疗次数,2组差异均有统计学意义（P均〈0．05）,EVLR组明显优于EVL组,且EVLR组急诊止血率可达100％。但近期再出血率、静脉曲张复发率、并发症发生率、病死率与EVL组相比,差异均无统计学意义（P均〉0．05）。结论经反转镜贲门下环周套扎法可以提高食管胃静脉曲张破裂急诊止血率,较常规套扎显效率高,治疗次数少,安全性高。     

肝硬化食管静脉曲张出血的急诊内镜下套扎治疗

目的 探讨急诊内镜下紧急套扎治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张(EV)破裂出血的安全性及止血效果。方法 对89例肝硬化EV出血患者在急诊状态下紧急内镜套扎,监测套扎术前、术中及结束时血压、心率、呼吸变化,观察套扎过程对生命体征的影响。结果 急诊止血成功率达98.9％,套扎过程对生命体征无明显影响(P均>0.05),术中无并发症发生。近期再出血2例。肝硬化患者76例随访3-30个月,死亡11例,病死率14.5％。结论 紧急EVL治疗肝硬化EV破裂出血是一种安全、有效、快捷的止血方法。     

食管胃静脉曲张内镜下序贯治疗效果分析

[目的]观察内镜下套扎、硬化剂注射、组织胶注射法对食管胃静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效。[方法]选取诊断为食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血的住院患者68例,观察患者经过内镜下序贯治疗后再出血的发生率、静脉曲张的消失率,以及并发症情况。[结果]68例均取得了良好的治疗效果,近期止血率100%,62例随诊6个月后曲张静脉消失或基本消失,并发症较少。[结论]内镜下序贯治疗食管胃静脉曲张破裂出血安全有效,值得推荐。     

内镜下硬化剂注射加食管球囊压迫治疗食管静脉曲张出血的临床研究

目的探讨内镜下硬化剂注射加食管球囊压迫治疗食管静脉曲张出血的疗效及安全性。方法收集我院消化科2009年至2013年收治的101例食管静脉曲张破裂出血进行内镜下硬化剂注射加食管球囊压迫止血及食管静脉曲张内镜下套扎止血的患者,观察其止血成功率,静脉曲张消失率,近再出血率及并发症发生率,进行回顾性对比分析。结果硬化剂加食管球囊压迫组,止血成功率92.9%,近期再出血率为7.14%,静脉曲张消失率和基本消失率为85.7%,总并发症发生率9.5%。套扎组,止血成功率为89.8%。近期再出血率11.9%。静脉曲张消失率和基本消失率为81.4%。总并发症发生率为11.9%。两组在止血成功率,静脉曲张消失率,近再出血率及总并发症发生率比较(P0.05),无显著性差异。结论内镜下硬化剂注射加食管球囊压迫治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血有效、安全、可靠。但其内镜操作是较为繁琐,有待于进一步改进。     

内镜下套扎联合部分脾动脉栓塞术治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血

目的探讨内镜食管曲张静脉套扎联合部分脾动脉栓塞术治疗胃底食管静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效。方法对30例肝硬化食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血病人行内镜下曲张静脉套扎术（EVL），联合部分脾动脉栓塞术（PSA）。观察近期止血效果、远期出血率、脾脏厚度和外周血细胞变化。结果联合术后病人脾功能亢进缓解，远期出血率降低，无严重并发症。结论EVL＋PSE是治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血和脾功能亢进安全有效的方法。     

急诊内镜下硬化治疗食管静脉曲张破裂大出血12年回顾

目的探讨急诊内镜下硬化治疗食管静脉曲张破裂大出血近期止血效果,分析其术后相关并发症及可能机制。方法收集苏州大学第三附属医院2003年1月-2014年12月急诊内镜下硬化治疗食管静脉曲张破裂大出血523例次的临床资料,回顾性分析其止血率、再出血率及并发症情况。结果急诊内镜下硬化治疗523例次,483例次止血成功,急诊止血率92.4%。硬化治疗后72 h~1周再出血105例次,再出血率20.1%。急诊内镜下硬化治疗患者中,出现中-高热48例,胸痛者45例,早期并发症发生率17.8%。结论急诊内镜下硬化治疗简便、高效,近期并发症少,对于食管静脉曲张破裂大出血患者可作为急诊止血首选方案。     

内镜套扎联合硬化剂夹心法治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的远期疗效观察

[目的]探讨内镜下静脉曲张套扎同时应用硬化剂夹心法(套扎-硬化-套扎即EVL-EVS-EVL)治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效。[方法]对23例肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血的患者采用夹心法治疗,每条曲张静脉结扎皮圈不超过3个,并在2个结扎点之间的曲张静脉内注射l~3ml硬化剂。其中10例在首次内镜治疗时接受食管静脉造影检查。于治疗后2周、1个月、3个月、6个月、12个月胃镜随访,了解静脉曲张变化情况,记录患者不良反应及并发症。[结果]10例行静脉造影检查中7例硬化剂在曲张静脉内滞留时间超过40min。夹心法控制活动性食管静脉曲张出血的止血成功率为100%,静脉曲张消除率为86.9%(20/23),再出血发生率为8.6%(2/23),随访期内静脉曲张复发率为13.0%(3/23)。[结论]夹心法能使硬化剂在曲张静脉内滞留较长时间,在一次治疗后能有效提高静脉曲张消除率,降低再出血率及静脉曲张复发率,是内镜下治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的较理想选择。     

Endoscopic ligation vs. sclerotherapy in adults with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sclerotherapy is a well-established treatment for bleeding esophageal varices, although it has a substantial complication rate. A prospective randomized trial was conducted to determine whether endoscopic variceal ligation is safer and more effective than sclerotherapy in adults with bleeding esophageal varices because of extrahepatic portal venous obstruction. METHODS: Thirty-six patients underwent sclerotherapy and 37 had band ligation. RESULTS: Ligation and sclerotherapy were equally effective for achieving variceal eradication (94.6% vs. 91.7%, respectively; p=0.67). However, ligation achieved eradication with fewer endoscopic sessions (3.7 [1.2] vs. 7.7 [3.3]; p <0.0001) and within a shorter time interval (50.1 [17.7] days vs. 99 [54.8] days; p <0.0001). In the ligation group, recurrent bleeding was less frequent (2.7% vs. 19.4%; p=0.028; however, Bonferroni correction for multiple testing removes this significance) and the rate of major complications was lower (2.7% vs. 22.2%; p=0.014). Total cost per patient was significantly higher in the sclerotherapy vs. the ligation group ($216.6 [71.8] vs. $182.6 [63.4]; p=0.035). During the follow-up period after variceal eradication, no significant differences were found between the sclerotherapy and the ligation groups with respect to recurrent bleeding (3% vs. 2.9%; p=1.0), esophageal variceal recurrence (9.1% vs. 11.4%; p=1.0), and formation of new gastric varices (9.1% vs. 14.3%; p=0.51). CONCLUSIONS: Variceal band ligation is superior to sclerotherapy, because it is less costly and achieves variceal eradication more quickly, with lower relative frequencies of recurrent variceal bleeding and complications.     

Sclerotherapy versus banding in the treatment of variceal bleeding

Endoscopic sclerotherapy has been the mainstay in the management of esophageal variceal bleeding to control acute bleeding and decrease recurrent bleeding. Endoscopic variceal ligation is a new technique that is equally effective in the control of acute bleeding but achieves obliteration of varices in fewer treatment sessions with presumably less cost, results in a lower rebleeding rate, has fewer complications, and is associated with reduced mortality. Combination therapy with both endoscopic variceal ligation and endoscopic sclerotherapy appears to have no clear advantage over variceal ligation alone. On the basis of the results of a number of trials comparing sclerotherapy with band ligation, endoscopic variceal ligation has evolved to be the preferred first line modality for the endoscopic treatment of variceal bleeding.     

内镜下套扎治疗晚期血吸虫病食道静脉曲张破裂出血68例

目的 探讨内镜下套扎治疗晚期血吸虫病食道静脉曲张破裂出血的效果。方法 130例晚期血吸虫病食道静脉曲张破裂出血住院患者随机分成2组,治疗组68例接受急诊内镜下套扎治疗,对照组62例给予常规内科治疗。观察各组继续出血率及静脉曲张红色征消失情况等,并进行比较。结果 治疗组继续出血率为10.3%,静脉曲张红色征阳性率为8.8%,均优于对照组,差异有统计学意义（P均＜0.01）。结论 内镜下套扎治疗是晚期血吸虫病食道静脉曲张破裂出血的一种有效止血方法。     

Comparison of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy with sequential endoscopic band ligation plus low-dose sclerotherapy for secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage: a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy and band ligation both have certain limitations such as, respectively, esophageal complications and early recurrence of varices. METHODS: From February 1994 to March 1996, all consecutive patients with portal hypertension due to either cirrhosis or noncirrhotic portal fibrosis and a history of variceal bleeding were included in a prospective study and randomly assigned to receive either endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy alone or endoscopic variceal band ligation plus low-dose endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy. RESULTS: Of 69 patients, 34 were randomly assigned to receive endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy alone; 35 received endoscopic variceal band ligation plus endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy. Complete variceal eradication rates (85% vs. 80%) and the number of endoscopic sessions required for eradication (6.61 +/- 2.94 vs. 7.85 +/- 3.31) were similar in the endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy and endoscopic variceal band ligation plus endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy groups, respectively. The mean volume of sclerosant required in the combined group (54.94 +/- 33.74 mL) was significantly less than that in the endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy group (81.91 +/- 34.80 mL). The complication and recurrent bleeding rates were significantly higher in the endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy group than those in the combined group (20% and 16% vs. 3% and 3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy and endoscopic variceal band ligation plus endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy were comparable in eradicating varices but the combined technique was associated with significantly lower complication and recurrent bleeding rates.     

Do we need endoscopic sclerotherapy of oesophageal varices or the last turn off the light

For the primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding endoscopic band ligation has been shown to be as effective as non-selective beta-blockers (carvedilol), but variceal injection sclerotherapy is not generaly recommended in this setting because of higher rate of complications and lower effect in reducing either bleeding or mortality. Endoscopic management of acutely bleeding gastroesophageal varices includes injection sclerotherapy, rubber band ligation, and variceal obturation with tissue adhesives. Variceal injection sclerotherapy remains a quick, simple and cheap technique for the control of active bleeding from esophageal varices, but is associated with more rebleeding than variceal band ligation, which is now preferred also for lower rate of complications. Endoscopic sclerotherapy has increasingly been replaced by ligation also in secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. The studies showed that band ligation can eradicate varices in fewer sessions, re-bleeding and complications were fewer in comparison with variceal injection sclerotherapy. Because of the reduced efficacy, severe complications, and the high mortality associated with using conventional sclerosants in acute bleeding gastric varices, the technique of injecting tissue adhesives has been studied, described and used despite numerous complications. Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy of esophageal varices remains usable as an oldest method in arresting of this hemorrhage only in rare cases when the band ligation is not available.     

Long-term follow-up of patients with liver cirrhosis after endoscopic esophageal varices ligation therapy: comparison with ethanol injection therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Esophageal variceal hemorrhage is the most dreaded complication of liver disease. Prevention or emergency therapy of bleeding is important. METHODOLOGY: A group of 217 patients underwent endoscopic esophageal variceal therapy including endoscopic ethanol injection, endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation, or a combination of the two. RESULTS: Esophageal varices were eradicated by endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation with the least sessions required, and associated complications with endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation therapy were lower than with the other two approaches. However, the cumulative recurrence-free period of esophageal varices was significantly higher after endoscopic ethanol injection than after endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation and in some cases F3 varices were observed post-endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation hemorrhage. A combined endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation and endoscopic ethanol injection therapy had no advantage with respect to cumulative recurrence-free rate, session number, or complication frequency, relative to either therapy alone. CONCLUSIONS: While the combined observations indicate that endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation is safe and simple, we should consider additional therapy to achieve complete mucosal fibrosis of the esophagus after endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation.     

内镜套扎与普萘洛尔预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张首次出血效能的Meta分析

目的比较内镜下套扎术（EVL）和普萘洛尔预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张首次出血的疗效和安全性。方法计算机检索1999至2012年12月31日PubMed、EBMBASE、万方数据库中关于EVL和普萘洛尔预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张首次出血的随机对照试验,同时追索纳入文献的参考文献。使用RevMan 5.1专业Meta分析软件对治疗后首次出血率,出血病死率,总病死率和不良反应发生率进行Meta分析。结果纳入6个随机对照试验,包括EVL组280例和普萘洛尔组301例患者。文献的Cochrane质量评价均为B级,属于较高质量文献。Meta分析结果显示,EVL在预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张患者的首次出血率、出血病死率、总病死率和不良反应发生率分别为16.4%、4.3%、22.5%和25.0%,与普萘洛尔组的21.6%（P=0.07）、6.3%（P=0.27）、20.9%（P=0.56）和31.9%（P=0.33）相比均无显著性差异;漏斗图存在不对称的现象,提示可能存在发表性偏倚;敏感性分析表明纳入研究具有稳定性。结论EVL与普萘洛尔在预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂的效能无显著性差异。     

Variceal Band Ligation in the Prevention of Variceal Bleeding: A Multicenter Trial

Background/Aim:

Variceal bleeding is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension with a high probability of recurrence. Treatment to prevent first bleeding or rebleeding is mandatory. The study has been aimed at investigating the effectiveness of endoscopic band ligation in preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with portal hypertension and to establish the clinical outcome of patients.

Patients and Methods:

We analyzed in a multicenter trial, the efficacy and side effects of endoscopic band ligation for the primary and secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding. We assigned 603 patients with portal hypertension who were hospitalized to receive treatment with endoscopic ligation. Sessions of ligation were repeated every two to three weeks until the varices were eradicated. The primary end point was recurrent bleeding.

Results:

The median follow-up period was 32 months. A total of 126 patients had recurrent bleeding. All episodes were related to portal hypertension and 79 to recurrent variceal bleeding. There were major complications in 51 patients (30 had bleeding esophageal ulcers). Seventy-eight patients died, 26 deaths were related to variceal bleeding and 1 to bleeding esophageal ulcers.

Conclusions:

A great improvement in the prevention of variceal bleeding has emerged over the last years. However, further therapeutic options that combine higher efficacy, better tolerance and fewer side effects are needed.     

Endoscopic ligation compared with sclerotherapy for bleeding esophageal varices in children with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction

Endoscopic sclerotherapy is an effective treatment for bleeding esophageal varices, but it is associated with significant complications. Endoscopic ligation, a new form of endoscopic treatment for bleeding varices, has been shown to be superior to sclerotherapy in adult patients with cirrhosis. To determine the efficacy and safety of endoscopic sclerotherapy and ligation, the 2 methods were compared in a randomized control trial in 49 children with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction who had proven bleeding from esophageal varices. Twenty-four patients were treated with sclerotherapy and 25 with band ligation. No significant differences were found between the sclerotherapy and ligation groups in arresting active index bleeding (100% each) and achieving variceal eradication (91.7% vs. 96%, P =.61). Band ligation eradicated varices in fewer endoscopic sessions than did sclerotherapy (3.9 +/- 1.1 vs. 6.1 +/- 1.7, respectively, P <.0001). The rebleeding rate was significantly higher in the sclerotherapy group (25% vs. 4%, P =.049), as was the rate of major complications (25% vs. 4%, P =.049). After eradication, esophageal variceal recurrence was not significantly different in patients treated by ligation than by sclerotherapy (17.4% vs. 10%, P =.67). In conclusion, variceal band ligation in children is a safe and effective technique that achieves variceal eradication more quickly, with a lower rebleeding rate and fewer complications compared with sclerotherapy.