Novel Approaches to Reducing the Risk of Variceal Hemorrhage

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 397-401 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederik Nevens
Keyword(s):  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Liver Stiffness ◽  
Metallic Stents ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Refractory Ascites ◽  
Variceal Hemorrhage ◽  
Endoscopic Screening ◽  
Balloon Tamponade ◽  
The Moment

Background: Complications of advanced liver disease occur at the moment of clinical significant portal hypertension. Nitric oxide (NO) dysfunction and fibrosis play an important role in the pathophysiology of PH, but other mechanisms are also involved. Non-selective beta blockers (NSBB) stay the cornerstone in the primary and secondary prevention of variceal bleeding, but their safety in advanced cirrhosis has been recently debated and new drugs are under investigation. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and balloon tamponade are the standard therapy in case of refractory variceal bleeding, but both interventions have drawbacks. Key Message: Transelastography under certain conditions and the presence of collateral circulation on imaging allow to rule-in CSPH, which makes patients open at risk for variceal hemorrhage. FXR agonists are intrahepatic NO donors; they reduce fibrosis and prevent bacterial translocation, which make them promising drugs for the treatment of PH. NSBB should be used with caution in patients with refractory ascites and certainly in those with hepatorenal syndrome. Preliminary clinical data suggest that simvastatin and enoxaparin improve the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis. Finally, covered esophageal metallic stents are safer and more effective than balloon tamponade in the case of refactory variceal bleeding. Conclusions: Liver stiffness measurements enable the selection of patients for endoscopic screening for esophageal varices. In the case of tense ascites, the dose of NSBB should be adapted to the hemodynamic condition of the patient. Self-expanding, covered esophageal metallic stents replace balloon tamponade in the treatment of massive variceal hemorrhage.

scholarly journals Pharmacotherapy of liver cirrhosis and its complications

2021 ◽  
pp. 23-27
Author(s):  
T. M. Bentsa
Keyword(s):  
Liver Cirrhosis ◽  
Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis ◽  
Hepatorenal Syndrome ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Refractory Ascites ◽  
Variceal Hemorrhage ◽  
Bacterial Peritonitis ◽  
Treatment And Prevention ◽  
Increased Risk

This article provides information about the pharmacotherapy of liver cirrhosis (LC) and its complications, such as variceal hemorrhage, ascites, increased risk of bacterial infection, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome LC is a major healthcare problem and is associated with an increased mortality due to the development of complications. LC is currently the 11th most common cause of death globally. Prognosis of LC is highly variable and influenced by several variables, such as etiology, severity of liver disease, presence of complications and comorbidities. In advanced cirrhosis, survival decreases to one or two years. Pharmacotherapy for LC should be implemented in accordance with up-to-date guidelines and in conjunction with aetiology management, nutritional optimisation and patient education. The main treatment of uncomplicated ascites is diuretics such as spironolactone in combination with a loop diuretic. For treatment refractory ascites vasoconstrictors and albumin are recommended. Antibiotics play a well-established role in the treatment and prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. For hepatorenal syndrome, the administration of vasopressor terlipressin and albumin is recommended. Endoscopic treatment is used for variceal bleeding (for example, ligation for esophageal varices and tissue glue for gastric varices). A shunt (TIPS) is used to treat severe or repeat variceal hemorrhage or refractory ascites. Non-selective beta-blockers effectively reduce variceal re-bleeding risk in LC patients with moderate/large varices. Thus, the treatment of LC as one of the most formidable multiorgan pathologies involves a comprehensive approach aimed at the correction of the main pathology and the treatment and prevention of its complications.

scholarly journals Motion – Prophylactic Banding of Esophageal Varices Is Useful: Arguments against the Motion

2002 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 693-695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kris V Kowdley
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Varices ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Ease Of Use ◽  
Endoscopic Sclerotherapy ◽  
Variceal Hemorrhage ◽  
Band Ligation

Bleeding from esophageal varices leads to substantial morbidity and mortality. Despite advances in pharmacological and endoscopic therapy, as well as general supportive care, the mortality rate associated with acute variceal hemorrhage has not improved significantly over the past two decades. Prophylactic therapy with nonselective beta-blockers or long acting nitrates reduces the incidence of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis, is cost effective and may improve survival. Surgical portosystemic shunting reduces the risk of bleeding but is associated with significant operative mortality and a high risk of portosystemic encephalopathy. Endoscopic sclerotherapy causes adverse effects in a large proportion of patients and is, therefore, not suitable for primary prophylaxis of bleeding. Although variceal band ligation is effective in reducing the rate of bleeding and is safer than sclerotherapy, it has not been shown to provide a survival advantage compared with beta-blockers. A significant reduction in the rate of variceal bleeding with band ligation, compared with beta-blockers, was shown in only one study. Beta-blockers offer several advantages, including low cost, ease of use and safety. The available data do not yet support the prophylactic use of variceal band ligation, and this procedure should be reserved for patients who are either unwilling or unable to take beta-blockers. It is hoped that additional large, multicentre trials of band ligation versus beta-blockers will examine the efficacy, cost effectiveness and impact on quality of life among patients with cirrhosis.

scholarly journals Management of variceal hemorrhage: current concepts

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabricio Ferreira COELHO ◽  
Marcos Vinícius PERINI ◽  
Jaime Arthur Pirola KRUGER ◽  
Gilton Marques FONSECA ◽  
Raphael Leonardo Cunha de ARAÚJO ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Portal Hypertension ◽  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Endoscopic Therapy ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Underlying Disease ◽  
Secondary Prophylaxis ◽  
Variceal Hemorrhage ◽  
Cirrhotic Patients

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of portal hypertension is complex and the the best strategy depends on the underlying disease (cirrhosis vs. schistosomiasis), patient's clinical condition and time on it is performed (during an acute episode of variceal bleeding or electively, as pre-primary, primary or secondary prophylaxis). With the advent of new pharmacological options and technical development of endoscopy and interventional radiology treatment of portal hypertension has changed in recent decades. AIM: To review the strategies employed in elective and emergency treatment of variceal bleeding in cirrhotic and schistosomotic patients. METHODS: Survey of publications in PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, SciELO and Cochrane databases through June 2013, using the headings: portal hypertension, esophageal and gastric varices, variceal bleeding, liver cirrhosis, schistosomiasis mansoni, surgical treatment, pharmacological treatment, secondary prophylaxis, primary prophylaxis, pre-primary prophylaxis. CONCLUSION: Pre-primary prophylaxis doesn't have specific treatment strategies; the best recommendation is treatment of the underlying disease. Primary prophylaxis should be performed in cirrhotic patients with beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation. There is controversy regarding the effectiveness of primary prophylaxis in patients with schistosomiasis; when indicated, it is done with beta-blockers or endoscopic therapy in high-risk varices. Treatment of acute variceal bleeding is systematized in the literature, combination of vasoconstrictor drugs and endoscopic therapy, provided significant decline in mortality over the last decades. TIPS and surgical treatment are options as rescue therapy. Secondary prophylaxis plays a fundamental role in the reduction of recurrent bleeding, the best option in cirrhotic patients is the combination of pharmacological therapy with beta-blockers and endoscopic band ligation. TIPS or surgical treatment, are options for controlling rebleeding on failure of secondary prophylaxis. Despite the increasing evidence of the effectiveness of pharmacological and endoscopic treatment in schistosomotic patients, surgical therapy still plays an important role in secondary prophylaxis.

Komplikationen der Leberzirrhose – medikamentöse versus interventionelle Therapie

2019 ◽  
Vol 144 (18) ◽  
pp. 1259-1266
Author(s):  
Lukas Sturm ◽  
Martin Rössle ◽  
Michael Schultheiß
Keyword(s):  
Liver Transplantation ◽  
Liver Cirrhosis ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Hepatorenal Syndrome ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Refractory Ascites ◽  
Effective Therapeutic Option ◽  
Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt

AbstractThe prognosis of patients with liver cirrhosis is impaired by complications such as variceal bleeding, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy and hepatocellular carcinoma. A steadily increasing array of treatment options for these complications is available, including pharmaceutical treatment (e. g. beta blockers for varices or diuretics for ascites), endoscopic treatment (e. g. band ligation of varices), radiological interventions (e. g. transjugular shunt, transarterial chemoembolization) and liver transplantation. Most of the complications occur due to portal hypertension. Therefore, decompressive treatment by implantation of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) an effective therapeutic option for many complications of liver cirrhosis. Its main indications are acute and recurrent variceal bleeding in patients with advanced disease as well as refractory ascites. The TIPS does not affect options of abdominal surgery and may therefore be used as a bridge to liver transplantation.

scholarly journals Endoscopic Band Ligation Versus Pharmacological Therapy for Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis: A Meta-Analysis

2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 147-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lan Li ◽  
Chaohui Yu ◽  
Youming Li
Keyword(s):  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pharmacological Therapy ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Isosorbide Mononitrate ◽  
Variceal Hemorrhage ◽  
Band Ligation ◽  
Endoscopic Band Ligation

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a meta-analysis of published, full-length, randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) versus pharmacological therapy for the primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis.METHODS: Literature searches were conducted using the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases. Eighteen randomized clinical trials that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were further pooled into a meta-analysis.RESULTS: Among 1023 patients in 12 trials comparing EBL with beta-blockers for primary prevention, there was no significant difference in gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.79 [95% CI 0.61 to 1.02]), all-cause deaths (RR 1.06 [95% CI 0.86 to 1.30]) or bleeding-related deaths (RR 0.66 [95% CI 0.38 to 1.16]). There was a reduced trend toward significance in variceal bleeding with EBL compared with beta-blockers (RR 0.72 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.96]). However, variceal bleeding was not significantly different between the two groups in high-quality trials (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.60 to 1.17]). Among 687 patients from six trials comparing EBL with beta-blockers plus isosorbide mononitrate for secondary prevention, there was no effect on either gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.95 [95% CI 0.65 to 1.40]) or variceal bleeding (RR 0.89 [95% CI 0.53 to 1.49]). The risk for all-cause deaths in the EBL group was significantly higher than in the medical group (RR 1.25 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.55]); however, the rate of bleeding-related deaths was unaffected (RR 1.16 [95% CI 0.68 to 1.97]).CONCLUSIONS: Both EBL and beta-blockers may be considered first-line treatments to prevent first variceal bleeding, whereas beta-blockers plus isosorbide mononitrate may be the best choice for the prevention of rebleeding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document