Practice patterns in endoscopic treatment for gastric varices: A Chinese survey.

OBJECTIVES: Gastric varices (GV), a common complication of liver cirrhosis, often cause serious consequences. However, the management of GV remains debated. In this study we aimed to explore the practice patterns of Chinese practitioners in GV treatment and discuss whether these patterns conform to the guidelines in China and around the world. METHODS: Between October 2020 and January 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to doctors from different regions in China via WeChat. Data on the practice patterns for endoscopic treatment with and without a multidisciplinary discussion team (MDT) clinic for GV were analyzed. RESULTS: Questionnaires were collected from 241 practitioners from 29 provinces in China. Before endoscopic treatment, 100 (41.5%) of the practitioners arranged computed tomography angiography (CTA) examination. In endoscopic tissue adhesive (ETA) treatment, 183 (75.9%) of the practitioners chose ETA combined with lauromacrogol. Approximately one-fourth of all practitioners did not prescribe drugs to reduce portal pressure. Only 75 (31.1%) of physicians preferred using early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for patients at a high risk of treatment failure for GV. Compared to those without MDT clinics, practitioners with MDT clinics more often chose early TIPS for high-risk patients (39.0% vs 18.9%, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment for GV differ across China. Practitioners with MDT clinics can better use assistant strategies such as CTA to evaluate the risk and efficacy. Further clinical studies are needed, and more guidelines and consensuses are warranted to standardize clinical practice for GV.

Balloon-occluded Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration of Portovenous Shunts During Endoscopic Therapy for the Treatment of Gastric Varices.

INTRODUCTION: To explore the safety and feasibility of balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) of portovenous shunts during endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for the treatment gastric varices (E-BRTO) secondary to portal hypertension. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 28 cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices and concurrent gastrorenal or gastrosplenorenal shunt, treated with E-BRTO, were enrolled. Operative details were recorded to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of the procedure. Short-term follow-up was conducted to denote any incidence of distant emboli, variceal rebleeding, or mortality (Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/SLE/A179). RESULTS: All the patients successfully received E-BRTO without intraoperative complications. The average volume of cyanoacrylate was 2.4±1.3 mL. During the 90 days follow-up, none of the patients experienced distant systemic emboli. However, 8 patients suffered from gastrointestinal rebleeding, including one death, while 2 patients were lost to follow-up. The short-term rebleeding rate (intention to treat) was about 36% in E-BRTO for this subset of patients. CONCLUSIONS: BRTO during endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection is an alternative selection for cirrhotic patients with portovenous shunts. The procedure is feasible and procedurally safe, but the associated high rebleeding rate may require a multimodality approach.

Long-term efficacy of endoscopic ligation plus cyanoacrylate injection with or without sclerotherapy for variceal bleeding.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes and efficacy of continued ligation plus cyanoacrylate injection compared with those of combined ligation and sclerotherapy plus cyanoacrylate injection for secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients with concomitant esophageal and gastric varices. METHODS: Medical records of the patients who were admitted for variceal bleeding due to liver cirrhosis were retrospectively reviewed and their related data was collected. The patients were divided into two groups, including the continued ligation plus cyanoacrylate injection group [the sclerotherapy (-) group] and the combined ligation and sclerotherapy plus cyanoacrylate injection group [the sclerotherapy (+) group]. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was conducted and log-rank test was used to compare the differences between the two groups. RESULTS: Altogether 125 patients were enrolled between 1 April 2004 and 31 December 2012. After a median follow-up of 23.4 months, no significant difference was observed between the two groups in regard to variceal rebleeding (29.7% vs 47.5%, P = 0.097) and mortality (12.5% vs 14.8%, P = 0.879). Among patients with ascites the cumulative rebleeding rate was significantly lower in the sclerotherapy (-) group (26.3% vs 59.4%, P = 0.020). A relapse of bleeding after the initial endoscopic therapy was an independent prognostic factor of rebleeding (P = 0.004). Portal thrombosis was an independent prognostic factor for mortality (P = 0.044). CONCLUSION: No superiority of combined ligation and sclerotherapy compared with continued ligation and cyanoacrylate injection for secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding is observed.