Viazis Nikos, Armonis Anastasios, Vlachogiannakos Jiannis, Rekoumis George, Stefanidis Gerasimos, Papadimitriou Nikos, Manolakopoulos Spilios, Avgerinos Alec
Second Departments of Gastroenterology, Athens University, Athens, Greece.
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2002 Mar;14(3):263-9. doi: 10.1097/00042737-200203000-00010.
Endoscopic methods are currently the most widely used techniques for the treatment of bleeding oesophageal varices (BOV). However, a number of complications may limit their usefulness. We conducted a prospective, randomized comparison of variceal ligation versus sclerotherapy in cirrhotics after the control of variceal haemorrhage to study the relative short-term risks of these two procedures with respect to oesophageal motility and gastro-oesophageal reflux.
Seventy-three patients with established cirrhosis and an episode of variceal bleeding controlled by one session of endoscopic therapy were randomized to treatment with sclerotherapy or ligation until variceal eradication. In 60 of these patients, oesophageal manometry and 24-h intra-oesophageal pH monitoring were performed at inclusion and 1 month after variceal eradication.
After variceal eradication with sclerotherapy, peristaltic wave amplitude decreased from 76.2 +/- 14.7 mmHg to 61.6 +/- 17.7 mmHg (P = 0.0001), simultaneous contractions increased from 0% to 37.9% (P = 0.0008), and the percentage of time with pH < 4 increased from 1.60 +/- 0.25 to 4.91 +/- 1.16% in channel 1 (P = 0.0002) and from 1.82 +/- 0.27 to 5.69 +/- 1.37% in channel 2 (P = 0.0006). In contrast, the above parameters were not disturbed with ligation.
Our data define the advantages of ligation over sclerotherapy with respect to post-treatment oesophageal dysmotility and associated gastro-oesophageal reflux.
内镜治疗方法是目前治疗食管静脉曲张破裂出血(BOV)最广泛应用的技术。然而,一些并发症可能会限制其有效性。我们对静脉曲张出血得到控制的肝硬化患者进行了一项前瞻性、随机对照研究,比较套扎术与硬化疗法,以研究这两种手术在食管动力和胃食管反流方面的相对短期风险。
73例确诊肝硬化且经一次内镜治疗控制静脉曲张出血的患者被随机分为硬化疗法组或套扎术组,直至静脉曲张消除。其中60例患者在入组时及静脉曲张消除后1个月进行食管测压和24小时食管内pH监测。
硬化疗法消除静脉曲张后,蠕动波幅度从76.2±14.7 mmHg降至61.6±17.7 mmHg(P = 0.0001),同步收缩从0%增至37.9%(P = 0.0008),通道1中pH<4的时间百分比从1.60±0.25增至4.91±1.16%(P = 0.0002),通道2中从1.82±0.27增至5.69±1.37%(P = 0.0006)。相比之下,套扎术未干扰上述参数。
我们的数据明确了套扎术相对于硬化疗法在治疗后食管运动障碍及相关胃食管反流方面的优势。