卡维地洛或普萘洛尔联合内镜套扎术预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张再出血的疗效和安全性的meta分析

背景:非选择性β受体阻滞剂联合内镜套扎术是食管静脉曲张破裂出血二级预防的首选方案。卡维地洛联合内镜套扎术可能有更好的治疗潜能。目的:系统评价卡维地洛或普萘洛尔联合内镜套扎术预防肝硬化食管静脉曲张再出血的疗效和安全性。方法:计算机检索中国知网、维普、万方、Pub Med、Embase、Cochrane Library数据库,纳入卡维地洛+内镜套扎术(试验组)与普萘洛尔+内镜套扎术(对照组)治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张再出血的随机对照试验。采用Rev Man 5. 3软件对纳入文献行meta分析。结果:共纳入7篇文献。Meta分析结果显示,试验组总有效率显著高于对照组(RR=5. 40,95%CI:3. 01～9. 69,P 0. 000 1),总出血率、不良反应发生率显著低于对照组(RR=0. 57,95%CI:0. 36～0. 89,P=0. 01; RR=0. 46,95%CI:0. 29～0. 73,P=0. 000 9),而两组死亡率、心率降低程度、平均动脉压降低程度无明显差异(RR=0. 66,95%CI:0. 33～1. 30,P=0. 23; MD=-4. 99,95%CI:-10. 04～0. 07,P=0. 05; MD=3. 59,95%CI:-0. 71～7. 89,P=0. 10)。结论:卡维地洛联合内镜套扎术对肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的疗效优于普萘洛尔联合内镜套扎术,出血率较低,不良反应较少,且不增加死亡率,安全可靠。     

套扎与硬化对肝硬化食管静脉曲张疗效的Meta分析

目的 比较内镜下套扎(EVL)与硬化(EVS)对肝硬化食管静脉曲张的疗效.方法 检索维普数据库、万方数据库和中国生物医学文献数据库、Pubmed 1985年1月-2012年7月发表的有关内镜下EVL和EVS治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张的相关文献,采用RevMan 4.2进行Meta分析.结果 有9项前瞻性随机对照试验纳入研究.Meta分析结果显示,EVL治疗的再出血率低于EVS治疗(OR=0.52,95％ CI:0.32 ～0.85,P=0.009),并发症少于EVS治疗(OR=0.30,95％ CI:0.20 ～ 0.43,P＜0.00001),达到食管静脉曲张消失需要内镜治疗次数少于EVS治疗(WMD=-1.24,95％ CI:-2.09 ～-0.38,P=0.004),而食管静脉曲张复发率高于EVS治疗(OR =2.21,95％ CI:1.47 ～3.32,P=0.0001),在急诊止血率、静脉曲张消失率、死亡率方面,两组差异无统计学意义.结论 与EVS治疗相比,EVL治疗再出血率低、并发症少、食管静脉曲张消失所需治疗次数少,因此EVL疗效更好,可作为内镜下治疗食管静脉曲张的首选.     

内镜下套扎序贯硬化治疗食管静脉曲张的荟萃分析

目的:对内镜下套扎序贯硬化(EVLS)治疗食管静脉曲张的疗效进行系统评价.方法:通过PubMed、维普和中国生物医学文献数据库检索1997-01/2007-12发表的有关内镜下EVLS治疗食管静脉曲张随机对照临床试验的相关文献.由2名评价员独立对纳入文献进行质量评价和数据提取,并使用RevMan4.2软件进行Meta分析.结果:按照纳入标准,有11项前瞻性随机对照临床试验纳入.EVLS组和内镜下套扎(EVL)组对食管静脉曲张疗效的比较结果显示:EVLS组食管静脉曲张复发率低于EVL组(RR=0.37,95% CI:0.25-0.55,P<0.01);食管静脉曲张消失率高于EVL组(RR=1.14,95%CI:1.05-1.23,P=0.001);而在再出血率、并发症发生率和死亡率方面,两组无统计学差异.EVLS组与内镜下硬化(EVS)组疗效的比较结果显示:EVLS组并发症发生率低于EVS组(RR=0.49,95%CI:0.31-0.75,P=0.001);食管静脉曲张消失率高于EVS组(RR=1.12,95%CI:1.04-1.20,P=0.004);而在食管静脉曲张复发率、再出血率和死亡率方面,两组无统计学差异.结论:EVLS在治疗食管静脉曲张方面较EVL或EVS更有优势,既保证了一定的疗效,又避免了高的并发症发生率,值得进一步推广.     

心得安单纯或联合使用在二级预防食管静脉曲张出血中的疗效比较

目的比较单纯心得安、套扎＋心得安、硬化剂＋心得安二级预防食管静脉曲张出血的疗效,探寻心得安二级预防食管静脉曲张出血的最佳组合。方法78例食管静脉曲张出血患者随机分成3组,每组26例,止血后分别给予心得安（心得安组）、套扎＋心得安（套扎组）、硬化剂＋心得安（硬化剂组）,比较各组12个月内再出血率、死亡率,以及各组门脉高压性胃病、胃底静脉曲张发生率、食管曲张静脉复发率。结果12个月内再出血率套扎组为30．77％,明显低于心得安组（53．85％）及硬化组（42．31％）（P均〈0．05）;套扎组和心得安组门脉高压性胃病及胃底静脉曲张发生率相似,都明显低于硬化组（P均〈0．05）;而食管静脉曲张再发率高于硬化组（P〈0．05）。结论在应用心得安的基础上进行套扎治疗可能是目前食管静脉曲张出血最有效的二级预防方法。     

食管静脉曲张的内镜下治疗现状

目的了解国外食管静脉曲张的内镜下治疗现状,比较各种方法的疗效及优缺点.方法复习了国外1985/1999公开发表的关于内镜下治疗食管静脉曲张的文献,就各种疗法在控制急性出血率、曲张静脉出血复发率、根除率及死亡率等方面作一比较.结果在控制急性食管静脉出血方面,食管套扎与硬化治疗疗效相似但略优,在控制静脉渗血方面,二者疗效相似,控制静脉喷血,套扎疗法优于硬化治疗,死亡率及并发症则显著降低.联合治疗分为同步联合疗法(synchronousEVL+EIS)及序贯联合疗法(sequentialEVL+EIS),同步联合疗法并不比单独套扎疗法优越且并发症较多,而序贯联合疗法在静脉曲张根除率方面,比单独硬化治疗要高,并发症及再出血复发率显著要低.结论食管静脉套扎或食管静脉套扎加硬化疗法联合治疗食管静脉曲张是目前较为理想的治疗方法.     

内镜下套扎术与药物预防食管静脉曲张破裂再出血效果比较的Meta分析

目的比较分析内镜下曲张静脉套扎术（EVL）与β-受体阻滞剂加5-单硝酸异山梨醇酯（ISMN）预防食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的疗效。方法应用Meta分析方法检索有关EVL与β-受体阻滞剂加ISMN预防食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的临床随机对照试验（RCT）,选取Jadad评分≥3分文献,以RevMan4．2软件进行相关指标OR值及其95％可信区间（CI）以及敏感性分析,绘制漏斗图判断有无发表偏倚。结果符合标准的RCT文献共4篇,患者总数为504例。随访时间为8～25个月。EVL与β-受体阻滞剂加ISMN应用后再发出血（OR=0．93,95％CI=0．41～2．11;P=0．87）、明确为食管静脉曲张破裂再出血（OR=0．68,95％CI=0．19—2．37;P=0．54）、治疗相关的不良事件（OR=1．12;95％CI=0．75—1．67;P=0．57）、严重不良事件（OR=0．89,95％CI=0．47～1．67;P=0．71）、出血性死亡率（OR=2．11,95％CI=0．88—5．08;P=0．10）以及总死亡率（OR=1．46,95％CI=0．95—2．24;P=0．09）等方面差异均无统计学意义。但相对于EVL,β-受体阻滞剂加ISMN的患者出血性死亡率和总死亡率较低。除再出血（P=0．003）和明确为食管静脉曲张破裂再出血（P〈0．0001）两个指标有异质性外,其它均无异质性。敏感性分析显示上述结果稳定性好。漏斗图显示较对称,提示无明显发表偏倚。结论β-受体阻滞剂加ISMN预防食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的死亡率和总死亡率有低于EVL的趋势,其与EVL总的不良事件及严重不良事件的发生率相当。因此,两者均可作为首选措施,用于食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的预防。     

普萘洛尔和经内镜硬化治疗预防肝硬化静脉曲张再出血的荟萃分析

目的:系统评价普萘洛尔和经内镜硬化疗法预防肝硬化静脉曲张再出血的有效性和安全性.方法:计算机检索PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library、CBM、CNKI、VIP数据库2009-02前发表的有关普萘洛尔和经内镜硬化疗法预防肝硬化静脉曲张再出血的随机对照试验,2名评价员独立对纳入文献进行质量评价和数据提取,用RevMan5.0软件统计分析.结果:共纳入9篇随机对照试验共计740例患者,Meta分析结果显示:两组在生存率(RR=0.97,95%CI:0.86-1.10)、病死率(RR=1.20.95%CI:0.90-1.59)方面差异均无统计学意义;普萘洛尔组再出血率高于经内镜硬化治疗组(RR=1.33,95%CI:1.14-1.54),但普萘洛尔组不良反应发生率低(RR=0.48,95%CI:0.26-0.86).结论:普萘洛尔与经内镜硬化治疗在预防再出血,再出血发生率高但不良反应发生率低.     

三腔二囊管序贯食管静脉曲张套扎术治疗肝硬化并EVH疗效观察

将234例肝硬化并食管静脉曲张破裂出血（EVH）患者分为两组,治疗组（99例）和对照组（135例）在禁食水、静脉输液基础上用三腔二囊管压迫止血,止血成功后治疗组序贯内窥镜下食管静脉曲张套扎术治疗。结果显示,治疗组与对照组24h止血有效率分别为93．94％和94．07％,P〉0．05;两组6个月上消化道再出血率分别为8．1％和17．04％,P〈0．05。认为三腔二囊管序贯内窥镜下食管静脉曲张套扎术治疗肝硬化并EVH十分有效,且可降低6个月上消化道再出血率,值得临床推广。     

小剂量硬化剂加固对食管静脉曲张术后的影响

目的探讨在密集套扎疗法的基础上进行硬化加固治疗对于食管静脉曲张复发的防治作用。方法对食管静脉曲张套扎治疗后食管曲张静脉消失或基本消失的患者进行硬化剂加固治疗,从齿状线开始依次向上在残存小曲张静脉内与血管旁粘膜下层注射5％鱼肝油酸钠,每点注射1—2ml,每次共注射10—14ml。观察其对静脉曲张消失后复发的预防作用。结果加固治疗组49例共行硬化治疗132次,平均2．7次,最多治疗4次。随访12～25个月,平均18个月。结果40例（81．9％）患者未发现食管静脉曲张再出现,原有细小静脉明显减轻或消失,9例复发。加固组与单纯套扎组再出血率有明显差异（10．2％对23．4％,P〈0．05）;超声内镜检查显示加固治疗组食管曲张静脉发现率明显低于单纯套扎组（42．9％对76．6％,P〈0．01）;加固治疗组与单纯套扎组穿通支血管检出率无明显差异（42．8％对57．4％,P〉0．05）。治疗后未发现严重并发症。结论套扎治疗后小剂量硬化剂加固治疗可显著减少套扎术后残留的食管曲张静脉、防止闭塞消失的静脉再通、预防再出血,有助于提高结扎术的长期疗效,延缓静脉曲张的复发。     

套扎和硬化法对食管静脉曲张出血治疗的比较研究

目的为比较六连发套扎和硬化注射治疗食管静脉曲张破裂止血的即刻和远期疗效进行了本研究．方法六连发套扎组共22例，平均年龄36岁，平均出血量1500mL．静脉曲张为重度．于治疗后6mo～12mo复查内镜2次．硬化注射组共24例，平均年龄40岁，出血量1420mL．静脉曲张为重度．静脉内注射5％鱼肝油酸钠20mL～40mL．住院期间进行3～4次注射治疗，随访12mo～18mo。结果套扎组即刻止血率100％，明显高于硬化注射组的79．2％（P＜0．05）．套扎组随访期内再出血率为9．1％，明显低于硬化注射组的33．3％（P＜0．05）．套扎组的平均住院天数为21d，注射组为36d．硬化注射组的住院死亡率为12．5％，与套扎组的0％无显著性差异（P＞0．05）．结论从比较研究的结果看，套扎治疗法对即刻止血优于硬化剂注射止血法，且在长期的随访中再出血的发生率也低，值得推广．     

Endoscopic variceal ligation compared with endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for treatment of esophageal variceal hemorrhage:A meta-analysis

AIM:To compare the effect of endoscopic variceal ligation(EVL)with that of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy(EIS)in the treatment of patients withesophageal variceal bleeding.METHODS:We performed a systematic literature search of multiple online electronic databases.Metaanalysis was conducted to evaluate risk ratio(RR)and95%confidence interval(CI)of combined studies for the treatment of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding between EVL and EIS.RESULTS:Fourteen studies comprising 1236 patients were included in the meta-analysis.The rebleeding rate in actively bleeding varices patients in the EVL group was significantly lower than that in the EIS group(RR=0.68,95%CI:0.57-0.81).The variceal eradication rate in actively bleeding varices patients in the EVL group was significantly higher than that in the EIS group(RR=1.06,95%CI:1.01-1.12).There was no significant difference about mortality rate between the EVL group and EIS group(RR=0.95,95%CI:0.77-1.17).The rate of complications in actively bleeding varices patients in the EVL group was significantly lower than that in the EIS group(RR=0.28,95%CI:0.13-0.58).CONCLUSION:Our meta-analysis has found that EVL is better than EIS in terms of the lower rates of rebleeding,complications,and the higher rate of variceal eradication.Therefore,EVL is the first choice for esophageal variceal bleeding.     

内镜下套扎、硬化剂及组织胶注射治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的近期疗效观察

目的观察肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者行内镜下套扎、硬化剂及组织胶注射治疗后食管静脉曲张程度、红色征及门静脉高压性胃病的变化。方法回顾性分析本院2011年9月-2013年9月收治的75例食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者,行首次内镜下套扎、硬化剂或组织胶注射治疗。2~4周后复查胃镜,对比治疗前后曲张食管静脉的数目与直径、红色征及门静脉高压性胃病在内镜下的改变。组内治疗前后的比较采用配对t检验,率的比较采用卡方检验。结果治疗后曲张食管静脉的数目及直径均小于治疗前[(3.08±0.96)vs(3.75±0.60),t=5.26,P0.05;(1.05±0.46)cm vs(1.49±0.26)cm,t=9.84,P0.05)],差异均有统计学意义。红色征的发生率较治疗前降低,差异有统计学意义(26.67%vs 57.33%,χ2=14.48,P0.05)。治疗后门静脉高压性胃病虽有所好转,但差异无统计学意义(70.67%vs 72.00%,χ2=0.03,P0.05)。结论内镜下套扎、硬化剂及组织胶注射治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血的方法安全、有效。     

Endoscopic variceal ligation is a sufficient procedure for the treatment of oesophageal varices in patients with hepatitis C liver cirrhosis: comparison with injection sclerotherapy

AIMS: Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is a recently developed alternative to endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) for the treatment of oesophageal varices. Endoscopic variceal ligation and EIS were compared in an attempt to clarify the efficacy and safety of EVL for patients with cirrhosis due to hepatitis C. METHODS: Endoscopic variceal ligation was performed in 60 patients and EIS in 30. Varices were eradicated in all patients by EVL and 87% (26 out of 30) by EIS. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between EVL and EIS in relation to the incidence of bleeding and the 5 year survival rate after treatment. There were no severe complications except mild substernal pain after EVL, while pulmonary embolism occurred in one patient receiving EIS. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic variceal ligation is a safe and effective technique for eradicating oesophageal varices in patients with hepatitis C cirrhosis.     

Improved Prognosis of Cirrhosis Patients with Esophageal Varices and Thrombocytopenia Treated by Endoscopic Variceal Ligation Plus Partial Splenic Embolization

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of the combination of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) and partial splenic embolization (PSE) compared with EVL alone in cirrhosis patients with thrombocytopenia. In a prospective study, 84 cirrhosis patients with esophageal varices and thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 50,000/mm(3)) underwent EVL plus PSE (N = 42) or EVL alone (N = 42). Primary end points assessed during the follow-up period included the recurrence of varices, progression to variceal bleeding, and death. Comparison between combined treatment and variceal ligation alone by multivariate analysis showed a hazard ratio of 0.44 for the recurrence of varices (P = 0.02), 0.19 for progression to variceal bleeding (P = 0.01), and 0.31 for death (P = 0.04). These results suggest that the combination of EVL plus PSE can prevent the recurrence of varices, progression to variceal bleeding, and death in cirrhosis patients with esophageal varices and thrombocytopenia.     

内镜套扎术在治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血中的临床应用价值

目的探讨内镜下食管静脉曲张套扎术（EVL）治疗和预防肝硬化患者食管静脉曲张破裂出血的临床应用价值。方法回顾性分析2008-01～2012-01该院142例肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者,其中行EVL治疗74例（治疗组）,内科保守治疗68例（对照组）,并对其临床疗效进行随访观察。结果所有患者随访6个月以上,治疗组的早期再出血率、迟发出血率、曲张静脉好转率、复发率、手术率及病死率均低于对照组（P〈0.05或〈0.01）。结论 EVL能有效地降低肝硬化门脉高压患者食管静脉曲张的程度,降低再出血率、复发率、手术率和病死率,是一种有效的内镜治疗手段。     

Risk factors and survival of early bleeding after esophageal variceal ligation

BACKGROUND/AIMS: In cirrhotic patients, esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) is still unpredictable and continues despite initial adequate treatment that is associated with great mortality. Bacterial infections are frequently diagnosed in cirrhotic patients with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). The aims of this study were to analyze the clinical risk factors and survival of early bleeding after endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). METHODOLOGY: A total of 96 cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices who received elective or emergent EVL procedure were analyzed. The variables for risk factors analysis included bacterial infection, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with or without portal vein thrombosis, etiology of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh status, and basic laboratory data. There were 19 patients with bleeding episode or rebleeding within 14 days after EVL. The remaining 77 patients were without bleeding event after EVL. RESULTS: Patients with Child C cirrhosis (odds ratio, 7.27; 95% CI, 2.20-24.07, P = 0.001) and bacterial infection (odds ratio, 130.29; 95% CI, 14.70-1154, P < 0.001) were independently associated with the early bleeding after EVL. However, there was no significant difference in long-term survival between patients with and without early bleeding after EVL. CONCLUSIONS: Bacterial infection and end-stage liver cirrhosis (Child C) are the independent risk factors for early bleeding after EVL. We should closely monitor the symptoms/signs of infection and empirical antibiotics should be administered once infection is suspected or documented, especially in cirrhotic patients with poor liver reserve.     

特利加压素联合内镜静脉曲张套扎术预防急性食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的研究

背景：食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血是肝硬化的危重并发症之一,内镜静脉曲张套扎术（EVL）是食管静脉曲张破裂出血的首选内镜治疗方案。对于急性食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者,推荐于EVL术后使用血管活性药物特利加压素3—5d以预防早期再出血。目的：明确特利加压素联合EVL对急性食管静脉曲张破裂再出血的预防作用。方法：96例急诊食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者行EVL后随机分为2组,对照组口服普萘洛尔10mg／d×5d,干预组静脉推注特利加压素1mg／d×5d,其后两组患者均以维持剂量长期服用普萘洛尔。记录术后5d内和3个月内的再出血发生情况。结果：干预组早期（5d内）再出血率显著低于对照组（2．1％对12．5％,P〈0．05）,两组近期（3个月内）再出血率无明显差异（4．2％对14．6％,P〉0．05）。结论：急诊EVL联合特利加压素预防急性食管静脉曲张破裂早期再出血的效果优于EVL联合普萘洛尔,远期结果尚需进一步随访观察。     

Efficacy of Endoscopic Esophageal Variceal Ligation in an Immunocompromised Host

Abstract: We successfully treated esophageal varices by endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) in a 50-year-old female patient with common variable immunodeficiency and liver cirrhosis secondary to hepatitis B. Under the existing disadvantageous conditions including the immunocompromised status, hyperal-lergic reactions to several drugs, chronic pulmonary infection, and impaired hepatic function, we considered EVL to be of greater potential benefit than endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS). This case highlights the possible merits of EVL over EIS, even in the presence of various restrictions, such as the immunocompromised condition of our patient.     

急诊胃镜下套扎术、硬化术和组织胶注射术治疗食管胃交界区静脉曲张破裂出血效果分析

目的探讨急诊胃镜下套扎术(EVL)、硬化术(EIS)和组织胶注射术(HI)在食管胃交界区静脉曲张破裂出血治疗中的有效性和安全性,以及不同止血方法的合理选择。方法选取2017年6月-2019年6月北京世纪坛医院和解放军总医院第五医学中心急诊胃镜止血治疗的肝硬化食管胃交界区静脉曲张破裂出血患者共1264例,按照急诊胃镜下不同止血方法进行分组,比较EVL组、EIS组、HI组间的操作成功率、止血成功率、早期再出血率及术后并发症;依据出血位置进行再分类,比较不同出血部位不同止血方法的止血成功率。计量资料3组间比较采用方差分析,计数资料3组间比较采用χ2检验。结果不同止血方法组间操作成功率差异显著(χ2=75.01,P<0.05),EIS、HI操作成功率明显高于EVL,EIS高于HI(P值均<0.05)。不同止血方法组间止血成功率差异显著(χ2=9.885,P<0.05),HI止血成功率高于EVL及EIS(P值均<0.05)。不同组间术后早期再出血率差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.290,P=0.865)。不同组间术后并发症比较,术后误吸并发肺炎、发热、胸骨后不适差异显著(χ2值分别为19.08、23.94、19.56,P值均<0.05);EVL术后误吸并发肺炎的发生率高于EIS、HI,HI术后发热比例高于EVL、EIS,EVL、HI术后胸骨后不适发生率高于EIS,差异均有统计学意义(P值均<0.05)。食管胃交界线(EGJ)线上1~5 cm内EIS、EVL止血成功率高;EGJ线上1 cm至线下2 cm内EIS与HI止血成功率无明显差异;EGJ线下2~5 cm内HI止血成功率高。结论EVL、EIS、HI为治疗食管胃交界区静脉曲张破裂出血有效方法,依据出血位置合理选择止血方法可提高止血疗效。     

Two Cases of Rectal Varices Treated by Endoscopic Variceal Ligation

Abstract: Case 1 was a 49-year-old asymptomatic, woman with enlarged esophageal varices due to cirrhosis of the liver. Fourteen days after the last session of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) for esophageal varices, colonoscopy revealed large tortuous rectal varices extending 4 cm from the dentate line. Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) was performed for rectal varices, and bands were placed on the varices at seven sites. There were no complications. Seven days after EVL, colonoscopy revealed ulcers in the rectum, and shrinkage of varices. Case 2 was a 62-year-old woman with general fatigue due to cirrhosis of the liver. At 50 years of age, she underwent a transection of the esophagus to remove varices, and splenectomy. At 57 years of age, EIS was per formed for recurrent esophageal varices. Colonoscopy was performed because of anal bleeding, and revealed tortuous rectal varices extending 5 cm from the dentate line. EVL was then performed, and bands were placed on the varices at eight sites, with no complications. Seven days after EVL, colonoscopy indicated ulcers in the rectum and shrinkage of the varices. EVL appears to be a safe and effective therapy for rectal varices. (Dig Endosc 1999; 11: 66–69)