View clinical trials related to Gastroesophageal Varices.
Filter by:Gastroesophageal varices are a complication of portal hypertension in cirrhosis.Endoscopy is an unsatisfactory screening test.In this prospective clinical study,we will enroll patients with cirrhosis of various causes, all of whom undergo laboratory tests, elastography, and serum proteomic differential protein testing, including liver elastography (LSM) and spleen elastography (SSM). Baveno VI or expanded BavenoVI criteria are validated by comparing patients' LSM, SSM, serum differential protein, platelet count, and EGD data to evaluate the clinical value of SSM and differential proteins in excluding cirrhosis of cirrhosis.At the same time, based on SSM and serum differential protein, a new predictive model of variceal varices will be established to evaluate the diagnostic value of SSM and differential protein for esophagogastric varices, and a non-invasive method for reliably predicting and evaluating cirrhosis with esophageal varices will be found.
Cirrhosis leads to portal hypertension and development of gastroesophageal varices, which are the most common cause for bleeding in cirrhosis and a major cause of death. The American Association for the Study of Liver Disease (AASLD) recommends screening endoscopy every 2 years to evaluate for gastroesophageal varices, and annual surveillance for those with small varices on endoscopy. Unfortunately, endoscopy is costly, requires sedation, is poorly tolerated, is subject to high inter-observer variability, and is associated with risks that include bleeding, esophageal injury and aspiration. Noninvasive methods for evaluation of gastroesophageal varices are needed. CT is noninvasive, rapid, less expensive than endoscopy, requires no sedation, provides a quantitative measure of the size of the varices, and allows for assessment of para-esophageal varices, varices in other body locations, ascites, other signs of portal hypertension, patency of liver vasculature, and detection, diagnosis and staging of hepatocellular carcinoma. Single-Energy CT (SECT) has relatively high accuracy in prospective studies for detection of any and large varices but is associated with suboptimal contrast opacification of gastroesophageal varices. Dual-Energy CT with the GE scanners with GSI Xtream (DECT) improves the contrast-to-noise ratio by 60% compared to SECT and is currently standard of care at UAB for evaluation of cirrhosis. The primary objective of this study is to determine the accuracy of DECT for detecting any varices and high-risk varices. The study hypothesis is that the accuracy (AUROC) of DECT will be >0.90 and >0.95 for detecting any and high-risk varices in a prospective pilot study (N=50) that uses endoscopy as the reference standard. This will be a single-center pilot observational prospective IRB-approved study. A total of 50 adult patients presenting to UAB Endoscopy for surveillance endoscopy to detect and grade gastroesophageal varices will be enrolled.
The investigators establish a randomized controlled clinical trial, comparing the efficacy and prognosis of GVL and GVO in secondary prevention of GVs, especially in patients with portosystemic shunting, and exploring the endoscopic treatment selection of different types of GVs. Outcome expectations: Compared with glue injection, endoscopic ligation for secondary prevention of gastric varices is safe and effective, especially in patients with portosystemic shunting.
Bleeding from gastroesophageal varices is one of the major complications of cirrhosis. After successful treatment of the acute bleeding episode, patients who do not receive follow-up treatment to prevent rebleeding were reported to have a rebleeding rate of 60% within 1- 2 years. The presence of liver cancer and/or portal vein thrombosis has been associated with recurrent variceal bleeding. In a study of liver cancer patients in Hong Kong, 7.9% of patients developed at least 1 episode of variceal bleeding over the course of liver cancer. In patients with portal hypertension from cirrhosis, current guidelines recommend non-selective beta-blocker, endoscopic band ligation for esophageal varices after initial bleeding, and either cyanoacrylate injection for variceal obturation or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for gastric varices after initial bleeding. However, it is unclear whether the above strategies will have the same clinical effect for patients with liver cancer and/or portal vein thrombosis who are at high risk for recurrent bleeding. Recently, the technique of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided cyanoacrylate (glue) injection for variceal obturation has been described. In a study of patients with gastric variceal bleeding, EUS guided glue injection and coiling was reported to achieve hemostasis in all patients and 96% of the gastric varices remained obliterated during the follow-up period. To date, there has been no dedicated study to evaluate the role of EUS guided glue injection for prevention of future bleeding in patients at high risk for recurrent variceal bleeding such as those with liver cancer or portal vein thrombosis. The investigators propose this study to evaluate the feasibility and safety of EUS guided glue injection for follow-up variceal treatment in patients at high risk for recurrent variceal bleeding, such as those with liver cancer and/or portal vein thrombosis.
Gastric varices occur in 5-33% of patients with portal hypertension. Concomitant gastro esophageal varices are the most common type. Both endoscopic sclerotherapy and band ligation are very effective in controlling acute esophageal varices bleeding and preventing rebleeding.
The purpose of the study is to compare the effect of HVPG-guided individualized therapy and non-HVPG guided traditional therapy in cirrhotic patients for secondary prophylaxis.