View clinical trials related to Esophageal and Gastric Varices.
Filter by:Liver cirrhosis is a common diffuse and persistent liver disease often accompanied by portal hypertension, liver failure, upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), and other complications. The incidence rate of liver cirrhosis with UGIB is as high as 30-40%, which is related to the rupture bleeding of gastroesophageal varices (GOV), hepatogenic ulcer, portal hypertensive gastropathy, hepatic gastrointestinal failure, etc
The prevalence of gastric varices is approximately 20%. It is important to note that gastric varices tend to bleed more severely, have a higher morbidity and mortality rate, and have a 35% to 90% risk of rebleeding after the cessation of acute hemorrhage. Because of the relatively low prevalence of gastric varices, the existing clinical studies have many deficiencies, and there is much controversy in the academic community, the optimal treatment and prevention strategies for gastric varices have not yet been fully defined. In the last few years, important advances have been made in the treatment and prevention of gastric variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. Experts agree that the combination of pharmacological and endoscopic injection of tissue adhesives should be the first line of therapy in the acute bleeding episode from isolated gastric varices (IGV1) or type 2 gastroesophageal varices (GOV2) varices; whereas transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is considered a rescue therapy. TIPS has been shown to effectively prevent variceal rebleeding but with a potential increase in the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy and/or liver failure. In this sense, a recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) in fundal variceal bleeding showed that an early TIPS, performed during the first 5 days after patient admission resulted in a significant decrease in failure to control bleeding and early and late rebleeding. However, the study was conducted for 4 years and only included 25 patients. Due to insufficient sample size, it was unable to reflect whether priority TIPS can bring survival benefits to patients with gastric variceal bleeding. Therefore, there is an urgent need for multi-center clinical studies with large samples to provide high-quality evidence in the field of prioritizing TIPS for the treatment of acute gastric variceal bleeding. The present study aims to compare the preemptive TIPS (performed during the first 72 hours after endoscopy) with standard second prophylaxis (endoscopic injection of tissue adhesives plus carvedilol) for patients with acute bleeding from gastric varices (IGV1 or GOV2). The primary outcome will be a 6-week mortality from inclusion.
Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) can lead to a further increase in portal venous pressure and increase the risk of rebleeding. Whether patients with acute esophagogastric variceal bleeding with occlusive PVT benefit from preemptive TIPS is still controversial. The present study is directed at comparing the outcome of patients with acute variceal bleeding with occlusive PVT treated by standard therapy (vasoactive drugs + endoscopic variceal ligation) with or without preemptive TIPS (performed during the first 1-3 days after endoscopic procedure). The primary outcome is survival free of variceal rebleeding at 6 weeks from inclusion.
Primary Outcomes: assessment of incidence , risk factors and prognosis of post-banding ulcer bleeding following EVL in patients with liver cirrhosis. Secondary Outcomes: minimize post-banding ulcer bleeding
HVPG is the gold standard for measurement of the presence and severity of portal hypertension. Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension (CSPH) is defined as HVPG ≥ 10 mmHg. Reducing the HVPG by use of non-selective beta blockers has been associated with reduced risk of variceal hemorrhage, ascites, SBP and thus has a positive effect on survival. Response to Beta blocker therapy is defined as a reduction of HVPG by 10% or to ≤ 12 mmHg. HVPG is an invasive method of assessment of portal pressures, with lack of availability at many centres. While non-invasive tests to predict CSPH have been defined, predicting response to beta-blockers non-invasively is an unmet clinical need. The aim of this study is to use splenic stiffness measurement, a non-invasive test, as a surrogate to assess the response of HVPG to beta blocker therapy.
The patients with GOV1 esophagogastric varices will be treated with gastric variceal tissue gel injection, at the same time, the esophageal varices were treated with ligation, sclerotherapy, or no treatment. A new method for the treatment of esophageal varices will be proposed to improve the effective rate and reduce the recurrence rates and mortality, shorter hospital stays, and lower treatment costs, while further expanding HVPG testing to develop the best strategy for secondary prevention of endoscopic treatment in patients with GOV1 type esophageal and gastric varices.
The aim of the study is to evaluate the ability of Doppler ultrasonography of the portal vein and liver stiffness measurement using Transient Elestoghraphy in predicting prescence of gastroesophageal variceal and variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis
Study population: All the consecutive patients of cirrhosis who are diagnosed to have large gastric varices without prior history of bleeding from GV, who came to OPD or endoscopy in Hepatology department of ILBS will be evaluated for inclusion. Study design: Prospective interventional study. The study will be conducted in the Department of Hepatology ILBS. Study period: 1.0 years Sample size: 60 This is a pilot RCT, and we decided to enroll 30 patients in each arm.
The aim of this study is to explore whether using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to assess gastric varices (GV) and giving additional treatment according to the diameter and blood flow of residual after endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for GV can reduce the rate of GV rebleeding, mortality, the risk of adverse events, and cost-effectiveness. This study is a multicenter prospective, open-label, randomized controlled study, including 5 study centers: Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, The Southwest Hospital of Army Medical University, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University and Shanxi Coal Center Hospital. The total sample size is 150 patients, with 75 patients in the EUS evaluation group and 75 patients in the control group, respectively. The patients who meet the inclusion and exclusion criteria are randomly assigned to EUS evaluation group and control group by using block randomization. The EUS evaluation group uses EUS to observe the diameter and blood flow of residual variceal veins after endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for GV to evaluate the embolization effect. Endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection is performed again if the diameter of variceal vein is larger than 5 mm and with blood flow signal. After the injection, the blood flow signal is confirmed disappear by EUS. The control group return to the ward after endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection, without EUS evaluation. During the study, the patients are followed up for at least 12 months, and they are requested to return to the hospital for follow-up at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months after the treatment, respectively. The data of baseline, treatment, postoperative and follow-up of the two groups are need to collect. The primary outcome of this study is rebleeding rate. Secondary outcomes are eradication rate of GV, mortality rate, retreatment, and cost-effectiveness.
Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common complication of liver cirrhosis which caused by esophageal and gastric varices. The risk of bleeding from gastric varices is relatively low. However, the bleeding is usually significant and severe. Current guidelines recommend endoscopic glue injection as the first line of treatment for gastric variceal bleeding. Although this technique has been shown to be effective, it is associated with many severe adverse events including systemic embolization, fever, chest pain, and even death. The rate of hemostasis has been reported to be as high as 91-100% but the rebleeding rate from gastric varices still present. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided therapy has recently been introduced as a more effective and safer option than endoscopic therapy for gastric varices. EUS-guided therapy includes EUS guided Cyanoacrylate injection alone or in combination with EUS-guided coiling. It offers the advantage of directly visualizing the varices and delivering targeted therapy. A standard endoscopic examination only allows the evaluation of superficial varices. The use of Endoscopic ultrasound facilitates evaluation of peri-gastric and perforating vessels, which are directly involved in variceal development. EUS also facilitates accurate placement of the coil and preserves the naturally formed splenorenal shunt. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration(BRTO) has been reported to achieve satisfactory bleeding control rates for isolated gastric varices with High hemostasis rates and low rebleeding rate. Despite all these promising results, there are scarce studies describing and comparing the efficacy of EUS-guided therapy and BRTO in patients with gastric varices. Further prospective comparative studies are needed.