scholarly journals Effects of Proton Pump Inhibitor on Gastroesophageal Varices of Cirrhosis: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoning Chen ◽  
Tao Zhou ◽  
Ting Zhou ◽  
Yueyue Li ◽  
Xin Sun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Endoscopic Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Secondary Prophylaxis ◽  
Gastroesophageal Varices ◽  
Acute Bleeding

Abstract BackgroundThe use of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) for gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis after endoscopic therapy remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PPI on gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis after endoscopic therapy, including variceal bleeding and adverse events.MethodsBetween May 2017 and June 2019, cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices confirmed by endoscopy were considered for enrollment in this study. Eligible subjects were randomized into two groups: one group received PPI for 14 days and the other group did not undergo PPI treatment. Patients were followed up for 8 weeks.ResultsDuring the follow-up period, three patients (3/53, 5.66%) in the PPI group experienced variceal bleeding on day 9, 16, and 25 after endoscopic therapy, including one patient with primary prophylaxis and two with acute bleeding. In the non-PPI group, three patients (3/56, 5.66%) suffered from variceal bleeding on day 7, 42, and 56 after endoscopic therapy, including two patients with secondary prophylaxis and one with acute bleeding (P>0.99). The rate of adverse events was similar between the two groups (38% vs. 28%, P=0.30). Furthermore, the average hospitalization expense of patients in the PPI group was higher than that of patients in the non-PPI group ($2305 vs. $3096, P<0.001).ConclusionsPPI does not appear to reduce variceal bleeding and adverse events in patients with cirrhosis after endoscopic therapy.Trial registration: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 03175731, 05/06/2017).

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.

A double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of proton pump inhibitor therapy in patients with uninvestigated dyspepsia

2002 ◽  
Vol 97 (12) ◽  
pp. 3045-3051 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Rabeneck ◽  
Julianne Souchek ◽  
Kimberly Wristers ◽  
Terri Menke ◽  
Eunice Ambriz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy ◽  
Inhibitor Therapy ◽  
Double Blind

scholarly journals Outcome of Post Esophageal Variceal Band Ligation with Sucralfate and Proton Pump Inhibitor vs. Proton Pump Inhibitor Alone in Cirrhotic Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-214
Author(s):  
Binod Karki ◽  
Ramila Shrestha ◽  
Bidhan Nidhi Paudel ◽  
Sudhamshu KC ◽  
Dibas Khadka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Proton Pump Inhibitor ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy ◽  
Ulcer Formation ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Esophageal Variceal ◽  
Band Ligation ◽  
Mean Size ◽  
Group B

Introduction: Endoscopic band ligation is the mainstay of treatment in bleeding varices in cirrhosis.  Subsequent bleeding from the band ulcers is a possible complication. Proton pump inhibitors and Sucralfate are commonly used post band ligation and often in combination. The aim of the study was to identify the advantage of combining Sucralfate to proton pump inhibitor in reducing the number and size of band ulcers.Materials and Methods: This was an open-label comparative study conducted in a tertiary level hospital of Nepal. Patients with cirrhosis after band ligation were included. Eligible patients were randomized into a proton pump inhibitor alone (Group A) or proton pump inhibitor and sucralfate group (Group B) and they underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy after two weeks. Baseline parameters, number and mean size of band ulcers were compared.Results: A total of 58 patients, 29 in each group, were evaluated. The baseline characteristics were comparable. EBL was done for bleeding varices in 51.7% and as primary prophylaxis in the rest of them. All the patients had band ulcers after two weeks. The mean size of the largest ulcer was 1.62±0.72 and 1.10±0.60 (p=0.78) respectively in groups A and B. Low albumin was significantly associated with OR of 8.7 (95% CI:1.68-44.99) for the formation of multiple (more than two) ulcers (p=0.01).Conclusions: The ulcer formation was universal after band application. The addition of sucralfate did not offer more benefits in terms of the number and mean size of the ulcer. Low albumin was the independent predictor for multiple ulcer formation.

scholarly journals Medical Management of Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Cirrhosis

2004 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan G Abraldes ◽  
Alessandra Dell'Era ◽  
Jaime Bosch
Keyword(s):  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Endoscopic Therapy ◽  
Portal Pressure ◽  
Portosystemic Shunt ◽  
Factor Vii ◽  
Injection Sclerotherapy ◽  
Variceal Hemorrhage ◽  
Elastic Band ◽  
Recombinant Activated Factor Vii ◽  
Gastroesophageal Varices

Bleeding from gastroesophageal varices is a frequent and often deadly complication of cirrhosis. The key factor in the natural history of esophageal varices is increased portal pressure, which in cirrhosis is due to the combination of increased hepatic vascular resistance and increased portal collateral blood flow. The maintenance and aggravation of this situation leads to the progressive dilation of the varices and thinning of the variceal wall, until the tension exerted by the variceal wall exceeds the elastic limit of the vessel, leading to variceal hemorrhage. Mortality from a variceal bleeding episode has decreased in the last two decades from 40% to 20% due to the implementation of effective treatments and improvement in the general medical care. Initial treatment should include adequate fluid resuscitation and transfusion to maintain the hematocrit at 25% to 30%, and prophylactic antibiotics (norfloxacin or amoxicillin-clavulanic acid). It is currently recommended that a vasoactive drug be started at the time of admission. Drug therapy may be started during transferal to hospital by medical or paramedical personnel and maintained for up to five days to prevent early rebleeding. Terlipressin, a vasopressin derivative, is the preferred agent because of its safety profile and proven efficacy in improving survival. Somatostatin is as effective as terlipressin, but may require higher than the usually recommended dosage. Octreotide is effective in conjunction with endoscopic therapy, but is the second choice because it has not been shown to reduce mortality. Vasopressin may be used where terlipressin is not available, but should be given in combination with transdermal nitroglycerin. Endoscopic elastic band ligation is the recommended endoscopic treatment, but injection sclerotherapy is still employed in many centres for active variceal bleeding. Failures of medical therapy (drugs plus endoscopic therapy) should undergo a second course of endoscopic therapy before proceeding to transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt or, in rare occasions, to portosystemic shunt surgery. Administration of recombinant activated factor VII may decrease the number of treatment failures among patients with advanced liver failure (Child-Pugh class B and C).

scholarly journals Management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BMJ ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. l536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian J Stanley ◽  
Loren Laine
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Proton Pump Inhibitors ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Endoscopic Therapy ◽  
Ulcer Bleeding ◽  
Vasoactive Drugs ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal

Abstract Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency, with a reported mortality of 2-10%. Patients identified as being at very low risk of either needing an intervention or death can be managed as outpatients. For all other patients, intravenous fluids as needed for resuscitation and red cell transfusion at a hemoglobin threshold of 70-80 g/L are recommended. After resuscitation is initiated, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the prokinetic agent erythromycin may be administered, with antibiotics and vasoactive drugs recommended in patients who have cirrhosis. Endoscopy should be undertaken within 24 hours, with earlier endoscopy considered after resuscitation in patients at high risk, such as those with hemodynamic instability. Endoscopic treatment is used for variceal bleeding (for example, ligation for esophageal varices and tissue glue for gastric varices) and for high risk non-variceal bleeding (for example, injection, thermal probes, or clips for lesions with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessel). Patients who require endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding should receive high dose proton pump inhibitors after endoscopy, whereas those who have variceal bleeding should continue taking antibiotics and vasoactive drugs. Recurrent ulcer bleeding is treated with repeat endoscopic therapy, with subsequent bleeding managed by interventional radiology or surgery. Recurrent variceal bleeding is generally treated with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. In patients who require antithrombotic agents, outcomes appear to be better when these drugs are reintroduced early.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document