The rebleeding course and long-term outcome of esophageal variceal hemorrhage after ligation: comparison with sclerotherapy

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic variceal ligation is widely accepted as the optimum endoscopic treatment for esophageal variceal hemorrhage. However, the rebleeding course and long-term outcome of patients with esophageal variceal hemorrhage after ligation have been poorly defined. Therefore, we conducted a long-term follow-up study to delineate the outcome of ligation and compare it with that after sclerotherapy. METHODS: One hundred and eighty-five liver cirrhotic patients with endoscopically proven esophageal variceal hemorrhage were randomized to undergo endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy or ligation. These patients received regular follow-up and detailed clinical assessment. RESULTS: Two patients developed hepatoma within 6 months of entry in each group and were excluded. Another six patients in the sclerotherapy group and seven patients in the ligation group were excluded because of poor compliance or lost to follow-up. Therefore, 84 patients in each group were analyzed. In this long-term follow-up (55.3 +/- 12.5 months) the rebleeding rate for ligation was lower than that for sclerotherapy, regardless of whether the rebleeding was analyzed by patient number or Kaplan-Meier analysis. With regard to the rebleeding risk of various periods, the sclerotherapy risk was higher than that of ligation within 4 weeks of the initial endoscopic treatment or before variceal eradication. Multifactorial analysis showed hematemesis, poor hepatic function, and sclerotherapy were the risk factors determining rebleeding. The annual hepatocellular carcinoma incidence was 4.9%. There was no difference in survival between sclerotherapy and ligation. Multifactorial analysis showed that poor hepatic function was the only factor determining survival. CONCLUSIONS: The rebleeding risk was higher in sclerotherapy than in ligation before variceal eradication, especially within 4 weeks of the initial endoscopic treatment. Long-term survival was dependent on hepatic reserve regardless of the treatment method.     

Recurrence of esophageal varices following endoscopic treatment and its impact on rebleeding: comparison of sclerotherapy and ligation

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic variceal ligation is superior to sclerotherapy because of its lower rebleeding and complication rates. However, ligation is not without drawbacks due to a higher tendency to variceal recurrence. We conducted a randomized cohort study to delineate the long-term history of variceal recurrence following ligation and sclerotherapy, and to clarify the impact of recurrence on rebleeding and on the consumption of endoscopic treatment resources. METHODS: Two hundred cirrhotic patients with esophageal variceal bleeding were randomized to undergo maintenance endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy or ligation. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-one patients achieved variceal eradication and were regularly followed up for 2.2 to 6.7 (mean: 5.1 +/- 1.2) years. The demographic data, hepatic reserve, bleeding severity, and endoscopic features of both sclerotherapy (n=70) and ligation (n=71) showed no difference. Forty (57.1%) patients who underwent sclerotherapy experienced 58 recurrences of esophageal varices, in contrast to the 46 (64.8%) patients who underwent ligation and experienced 81 episodes of recurrence. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that within 2 years variceal recurrence was more frequent for ligation than sclerotherapy, and the difference decreased thereafter. Multiple recurrence appeared more common with ligation (1/2/3/4/5 episodes of recurrence: 46/23/8/3/1 vs. 40/14/3/1/0, p=0.08). On multifactorial analysis, the endoscopic treatment method and red wale markings were the two factors determining variceal recurrence. Rebleeding from recurrent esophageal varices was unusual and showed no difference between the two groups (7/58 vs. 6/81, p>0.05). Rebleeding from gastric varices was more common after eradication by sclerotherapy (7/19 vs. 1/16, p=0.085) than by ligation. The number of sessions required for eradication of recurrent varices was no different between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early recurrence and multiple recurrence of esophageal varices are more likely in patients undergoing endoscopic ligation, compared to sclerotherapy; however, the recurrence did not lead to a higher risk of rebleeding or require more endoscopic treatment.     

Improved long-term survival following complete eradication of esophageal varices by sclerotherapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Conflicting results have been reported concerning the effect of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy upon the long-term survival of cirrhotic patients with esophageal varix. The recurrence and rebleeding of esophageal varices seems to be an important factor influencing long-term survival. We investigated the long-term survival of patients after complete eradication of esophageal varices. METHODOLOGY: Forty patients treated by endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for acute esophageal variceal bleeding were studied. The recurrence rate of varices and the long-term survival of patients in whom complete eradication of esophageal varices was obtained were compared with those of patients in whom the eradication of varices was incomplete. RESULTS: The frequency of the recurrence/deterioration rate of varices and rebleeding in the complete eradication group was significantly lower than that in the incomplete eradication group (10.7% vs. 100%, 0% vs. 58.3%, respectively, p < 0.01). Accumulated 5-year survival rate of the complete eradication group was significantly higher than that of the incomplete eradication group (68.2% vs. 43.2%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Complete eradication of esophageal varices by endoscopic injection sclerotherapy is effective both in preventing variceal re-bleeding and in improving the survival of cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices.     

Esophageal variceal ligation for acute variceal bleeding: results of three years' follow-up.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic variceal ligation is widely accepted as the optimum endoscopic treatment for esophageal variceal hemorrhage. However, the rebleeding course and long-term outcome of patients with esophageal variceal hemorrhage after ligation have been poorly defined. Therefore, we conducted a long-term follow-up study to delineate the outcome of ligation. METHODS: Twenty-one liver cirrhotic patients with endoscopically proven esophageal variceal hemorrhage were treated by endoscopic variceal ligation. These patients received regular follow-up and detailed clinical assessment of at least 24 months. RESULTS: Twenty-one eligible patients were followed up for a mean of 44.45 months (range 33.5-64 months). The mean number of sessions required to obtain eradication was 3.57+/-1.99 (range 1-8). Esophageal varices could be obliterated within 11.57+/-6.8 weeks (range 3-30). The percentage of variceal recurrence during follow-up was 57.14% (12/21) after endoscopic variceal ligation. Recurrence were observed in a mean of 34 months (median 29 months). Rebleeding from esophageal varices appeared in four patients (19.04%). The appearance rates of portal hypertensive gastropathy and fundal gastric varices after varice obliteration were found to be 45.45% (5/11) and 25% (3/12), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of long-term follow-up of endoscopic variceal ligation, although the percentage of variceal recurrence was high, endoscopic ligation achieved variceal obliteration faster and in fewer treatment sessions. Furthermore, endoscopic variceal ligation had a lower rate of rebleeding and of development of fundal gastric varices, but high portal hypertensive gastropathy.     

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.     

Combined ligation and sclerotherapy versus ligation alone for secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: Variceal ligation has been shown to be superior to sclerotherapy in prevention of rebleeding and improving survival in patients with cirrhosis. However, 25% of patients will rebleed before completion of treatment. A number of trials have compared the combination of ligation and sclerotherapy to ligation alone in achieving rapid and complete eradication of esophageal varices, with conflicting results. METHODS: Two reviewers independently identified seven randomized, controlled trials that compared endoscopic variceal ligation with the combination of sclerotherapy and ligation for the treatment of esophageal varices. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE, reviewing references from retrieved articles, and scanning abstracts from conference proceedings. For each outcome, odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using fixed-effects and random-effects models. The Mantel-Haenszel test for statistical heterogeneity was used to assess the validity of combining results from individual studies. RESULTS: No significant difference was seen in cessation of actively bleeding varices (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.43-2.36), variceal rebleeding (OR = 1.12, CI = 0.69-1.81), and mortality (OR = 1.1, CI = 0.70-1.74) in patients with variceal ligation versus patients receiving the combination treatment of ligation and sclerotherapy. Treatment sessions required to achieve complete variceal eradication were similar in the two treatment arms. A significantly higher incidence of esophageal stricture was seen in combination therapy (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of ligation and sclerotherapy offers no advantage over ligation alone in prevention of rebleeding and in reduction of mortality. It is also associated with a higher complication rate of esophageal stricture.     

Efficacy of absolute alcohol injection compared with band ligation in the eradication of esophageal varices

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sclerotherapy is an absolute indication for treating esophageal varices. Re-bleeding is common during the treatment period, before all varices become eradicated. AIM: To compare two techniques of endoscopic esophageal varices eradication: sclerotherapy with absolute alcohol and banding ligation. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Forty-six patients with liver cirrhosis and esophageal varices were prospectively randomized into two treatment groups: endoscopic sclerotherapy with absolute alcohol and banding ligation. Patients were included if they had large varices with signs of high bleeding risk. Informed writing consent was obtained from every patient and the Ethics Committee of Federal University of S?o Paulo, SP, Brazil, approved the study. After eradication, all patients were followed up to 1 year to look for re-bleeding episodes and variceal recurrence. RESULTS: Both groups were similar except that male gender was more common in the sclerotherapy group. There was no statistical difference regarding variceal eradication (78.3% in sclerotherapy group vs 73.9% in the ligation group), recurrence (26.7% vs 42.9%, respectively) and death related to any cause (21.7% vs 13.9%). In the sclerotherapy group more sessions were need to obtain complete variceal eradication. In this group we did observe a high re-bleeding rate (34.8%) and more ulcers associated with retrosternal pain right after the procedure. There was no difference regarding overall morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Banding ligation requires fewer sessions than sclerotherapy with absolute alcohol to eradicate esophageal varices. Both methods are equally efficient regarding variceal eradication and recurrence during a short follow-up period.     

Combination Endoscopic Band Ligation and Sclerotherapy Compared with Endoscopic Band Ligation Alone for the Secondary Prophylaxis of Esophageal Variceal Hemorrhage: A Meta-Analysis

Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the community-accepted standard therapy for the secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal hemorrhage. Recent data indicate that combination EBL and sclerotherapy may be a more effective therapy than EBL alone. Yet existing data are conflicting. We therefore performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of EBL and sclerotherapy versus EBL alone for the secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal hemorrhage. We performed a systematic review of two computerized databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) along with manual-searching of published abstracts to identify relevant citations without language restrictions from 1990 to 2002. Eight studies met explicit inclusion criteria. We performed meta-analysis of these studies to pool the relative risk for the following outcomes: esophageal variceal rebleeding, death, number of endoscopic sessions to achieve variceal obliteration, and therapeutic complications. There were no significant differences between EBL and sclerotherapy versus EBL alone in the risk of esophageal variceal rebleeding (RR = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.67–1.64; P = 0.83), death (RR = 0.99; 95% CI = 0.68–1.44; P = 0.96), or number of endoscopic sessions to variceal obliteration (RR = 0.23; 95% CI = 0.055–0.51; P = 0.11). However, the incidence of esophageal stricture formation was significantly higher in the EBL group than in the sclerotherapy group. There is no evidence that the addition of sclerotherapy to endoscopic band ligation changes clinically relevant outcomes (variceal rebleeding, death, time to variceal obliteration) in the secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal hemorrhage. Moreover, combination EBL and sclerotherapy had more esophageal stricture formation than EBL alone.     

Portacaval shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the elective treatment of variceal hemorrhage

Eighty-two consecutive Child-Campbell class A and B cirrhotic patients were included in a prospective controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of portacaval anastomosis vs. endoscopic sclerotherapy as elective treatment of variceal hemorrhage. Forty-one patients were randomized to portacaval anastomosis and 41 to sclerotherapy. After excluding dropouts, 34 patients were treated with portacaval anastomosis and 35 with sclerotherapy. The incidence of variceal rebleeding during follow-up (mean +/- SD, 20.6 +/- 14.2 months) was significantly higher in the sclerotherapy than in the portacaval groups, either considering the overall treated group or only patients completing sclerotherapy (40% and 25% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.0002 and P = 0.01, respectively). The 2-year probability of suffering from at least one episode of hepatic encephalopathy was significantly higher in patients submitted to portacaval anastomosis than in those treated with endoscopic sclerotherapy (40% vs. 12%; P = 0.04). However, disabling encephalopathy only appeared in 3 of 34 patients who underwent surgery (8.8%). Early and long-term mortality did not differ between the therapeutic groups; 2-year survival rates were 83% for portacaval anastomosis and 79% for sclerotherapy. It is concluded that portacaval anastomosis is more effective than endoscopic sclerotherapy in preventing variceal rebleeding in spite of the greater incidence of hepatic encephalopathy. The role of portacaval anastomosis in the elective treatment of variceal rebleeding should be reassessed.     

Comparison of endoscopic variceal injection sclerotherapy and ligation for the treatment of esophageal variceal hemorrhage: A prospective randomized trial

To determine the efficacy of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) and ligation (EVL) in the management of esophageal variceal bleeding, 134 cirrhotic patients were randomized to receive either treatment. The clinical and endoscopic characteristics were similar in both groups. Active bleeding was controlled with ligation (20 of 20) as efficiently as with sclerotherapy (14 of 16). Elective sclerotherapy consumed less time than ligation (7.9 ± 1.8 minutes vs. 11.5 ± 2.7 minutes, P <.001), but there was no difference between emergent sclerotherapy (14.5 ± 5.8 minutes) and ligation (14.9 ± 4.1 minutes). Ligation reduced one grade of variceal size more quickly than sclerotherapy (1.1 ± 0.4 vs. 2.0 ± 1.7 session, P < .001). The rebleeding rate was lower with ligation (13 of 67 vs. 28 of 67, P < .01). Esophageal ulcer was the most common source of rebleeding. Recurrence of varices appears more probable with ligation (P = .079). The complication rate was higher with sclerotherapy (15 of 67 vs. 3 of 67, P < .01), with esophageal stricture being the most common cause. Survival rate was the same in both groups even after stratifying patients into good and poor hepatic reserve groups. Hepatic failure was the major cause of death, followed by exsanguination. In summary, EVL was superior to EVS regarding rebleeding and complications but not in other aspects such as time consumption in elective treatment and recurrence of varices. Substantial results for long-term follow-up are required before conclusion of the treatment of choice.     

Endoscopic management for bleeding esophageal varices: sclerotherapy versus sclerotherapy plus band ligation versus band ligation alone. One year experience at a main hospital in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study was done retrospectively to compare the outcome of sclerotherapy alone, band ligation alone and band ligation alternating with sclerotherapy in treatment of esophageal varices. METHODOLOGY: During 1 year 30 patients were admitted with variceal bleeding. They received either injection sclerotherapy (8 patients) or band ligation (11 patients), and 11 patients had a combination of both either during first bleed or during follow-up therapy, which is more than 2 sessions in each group. RESULTS: The success rate for stopping first bleeding was 100% in the band ligation and sclerotherapy alone group. The rebleeding rate was 27% in the combination group, 9% in the band ligation group, and none had rebleeding in the sclerotherapy group during follow-up. Eradication of varices was observed in 33% of patients after a second set of sclerotherapy and band ligation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed no significant difference between sclerotherapy versus band ligation in stopping initial bleeding or eradication of varices during the follow-up period, but there was a difference in re-bleeding rates among the three groups.     

Role of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy in the long-term management of variceal bleeding: a meta-analysis

Seven randomized clinical trials evaluating the effect of repeated endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy on the long-term survival of patients with variceal hemorrhage have been published in the English-language literature. In four trials, the sclerotherapy-treated patients showed an improved long-term survival (follow-up periods longer than a year) when compared with patients in the medical regimen group, whereas in the other three trials, the long-term survival did not differ between the compared groups. Sample sizes in these "negative" trials were too small to detect a true moderate effect for serial sclerotherapy. To resolve this controversy, we combined the findings from all trials using a meta-analysis and determined the overall effect of repeated endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy on the survival of patients who had previously bled from esophageal varices. An overall risk difference of -0.15 (95% confidence limits, -0.21 to -0.08; p less than 0.0005) was estimated, indicating that sclerotherapy reduced the number of deaths by 25%. The estimated overall risk difference remained negative even when all patients in the sclerotherapy group with an unknown survival status were pessimistically considered dead at the end of the follow-up period. The results of this quantitative synthesis suggest that patients with bleeding esophageal varices benefit from the inclusion of repeated sclerotherapy in their long-term management regimen.     

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.     

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。     

Sclerotherapy for esophageal variceal bleeding in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: An 8-year experience in Taiwan

Between August 1983 and December 1991 at the Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan, 65 advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients with esophageal variceal bleeding received endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) and 60 such patients received conservative medical treatment without EIS. The rate of successful control of acute bleeding was 72.5% (27/40 patients) in the EIS group and 56.7% (34/60 patients) in the non-EIS group. The rebleeding rate was lower in the EIS group than in the non-EIS group (26.9% vs 73.5%). Thirty-one of the EIS and 44 of the non-EIS treatment patients, mainly Child's B and C patients, died within 2 months after the first bleeding. In the short term, EIS decreased the mortality due to esophageal variceal bleeding, but the survivors still had to face hepatic failure and tumor growth. Thus, benefits of EIS were noted on short-but not on long-term survival. The mean survival times were 2.38 months for the EIS group and 1.79 months for the non-EIS group. Since EIS had no beneficial effects on long-term survival it is doubtful whether sclerotherapy applied to esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with advanced HCC would be worthwhile, as the endoscopic procedure would only add to their suffering.     

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.     

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.     

Detachable endoloop vs. elastic band ligation for bleeding esophageal varices

BACKGROUND: Variceal bleeding is a serious complication with a mortality rate that ranges from 20% to 50%. Patients who have variceal hemorrhage usually are treated by endoscopic injection sclerotherapy or elastic band ligation to eradicate the varices. Endoloop ligation is a newly developed technique for achieving hemostasis and variceal eradication. This study compared endoloop ligation with elastic band ligation in patients with acute esophageal variceal bleeding. METHODS: Fifty patients with acute esophageal variceal bleeding were recruited: 25 were treated by elastic band ligation and 25 by endoloop ligation. RESULTS: Although the number of patients in whom bleeding recurred during a follow-up period of 6 months was smaller in the endoloop group (12%) vs. the band group (28%), this difference was not statistically significant. Furthermore, no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups with respect to the number of patients in whom variceal eradication was achieved, the number of treatment sessions required for variceal eradication, or the frequency of variceal recurrence. The total cost for variceal obliteration by endoloop ligation was 342 dollars per patient, whereas, the total cost of variceal eradication by elastic band ligation was 356 dollars per patient. The endoloop had certain technical advantages over band application: a better field of vision, tighter application, good results with junctional varices, and a lack of strain exerted by the device on the endoscope. CONCLUSIONS: Endoloop ligation is a promising new technique for management of patients with bleeding esophageal varices.     

Evaluation of 2 years' experience with elective endoscopic sclerotherapy of hemorrhagic esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients

The authors report their 2-year experience of esophageal endoscopic sclerotherapy for prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. Sixty-three alcoholic cirrhotics underwent sclerotherapy 10 +/- 6 days (SD) after hospital admission for variceal bleeding. Varices were successfully eradicated in 43 patients (68 p. 100), with an average of 3 injection sessions, over a mean period of 5 weeks. Unsuccessful treatment was due to abbreviated course of treatment because of early rebleeding and early mortality. Early rebleeding episodes after therapy occurred in 19 patients (30 p. 100): 10 in whom the esophageal varices were eradicated, 9 in whom sclerotherapy had failed. Recurrent hemorrhage was the cause of death in 6 patients. After variceal eradication had been achieved, new varices were observed in 7 p. 100 of patients after a mean follow-up of 8 months. The risk of further variceal bleeding was 0.008 hemorrhage/patient/month. Minor complications (thoracic pain, dysphagia, esophageal ulcers, pleural effusion) occurred in 60 p. 100 of patients. An esophageal stricture developed in 13 out of the 43 successfully treated patients (30 p. 100). Major complications occurred in 5 patients and was the cause of death in 4: mediastinitis, esophageal perforation, bronchoesophageal fistulae, cardiogenic shock and aspiration pneumonitis. The survival curve, assessed by cumulative life analysis, showed a 60 p. 100 survival rate after 12 months and 56 p. 100 after 18 months. It was significantly different (p less than 0.001) between groups of cirrhosis classified according to Child-Pugh's criteria (95, 52 and 9 p. 100 at 12 months for groups A, B and C respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

What is the aim of esophageal variceal sclerotherapy--prevention of rebleeding or complete obliteration of veins?

Endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) is highly effective in arresting active esophageal variceal bleeding. Subsequent repeated EVS sessions significantly reduce recurrence of bleeding; long-term survival is reported as prolonged or unaltered. In contrast, EVS for preventing first variceal bleeding (prophylactic sclerotherapy) is not recommended, even for high-risk patients, because it enhances mortality by significantly increasing the risk of bleeding in the treated group compared with controls. The risk of variceal rebleeding is maximum within 6 weeks of index bleeding; most patients who survive 6 weeks of variceal bleeding (with or without sclerotherapy) behave like patients who have never bled from varices. Thus, EVS continued beyond 6 weeks, to obliterate the veins completely, is akin to prophylactic sclerotherapy. Significant complications of EVS--its cost, discomfort to patient, and loss of doctor and patient time--should be weighed against doubtful benefit of continuing prolonged EVS beyond 6 weeks, just to completely obliterate esophageal veins. The possibility of better long-term survival with sclerotherapy limited to 6 weeks cannot be excluded, because prophylactic sclerotherapy shortens long-term survival.