Zargar Showkat Ali, Javid Gul, Khan Bashir Ahmad, Shah Omar Javid, Yattoo Ghulam Nabi, Shah Altaf Hussain, Gulzar Ghulam Mohammad, Singh Jaswinder, Shah Nisar Ahmad, Shafi Hakim Mohamad
Department of Gastroenterology and General Sugery, Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Sringar, Kashmir, India.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jan;61(1):58-66. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02455-1.
Endoscopic sclerotherapy is a well-established treatment for bleeding esophageal varices, although it has a substantial complication rate. A prospective randomized trial was conducted to determine whether endoscopic variceal ligation is safer and more effective than sclerotherapy in adults with bleeding esophageal varices because of extrahepatic portal venous obstruction.
Thirty-six patients underwent sclerotherapy and 37 had band ligation.
Ligation and sclerotherapy were equally effective for achieving variceal eradication (94.6% vs. 91.7%, respectively; p=0.67). However, ligation achieved eradication with fewer endoscopic sessions (3.7 [1.2] vs. 7.7 [3.3]; p <0.0001) and within a shorter time interval (50.1 [17.7] days vs. 99 [54.8] days; p <0.0001). In the ligation group, recurrent bleeding was less frequent (2.7% vs. 19.4%; p=0.028; however, Bonferroni correction for multiple testing removes this significance) and the rate of major complications was lower (2.7% vs. 22.2%; p=0.014). Total cost per patient was significantly higher in the sclerotherapy vs. the ligation group ($216.6 [71.8] vs. $182.6 [63.4]; p=0.035). During the follow-up period after variceal eradication, no significant differences were found between the sclerotherapy and the ligation groups with respect to recurrent bleeding (3% vs. 2.9%; p=1.0), esophageal variceal recurrence (9.1% vs. 11.4%; p=1.0), and formation of new gastric varices (9.1% vs. 14.3%; p=0.51).
Variceal band ligation is superior to sclerotherapy, because it is less costly and achieves variceal eradication more quickly, with lower relative frequencies of recurrent variceal bleeding and complications.
内镜下硬化治疗是治疗食管静脉曲张出血的一种成熟方法,尽管其并发症发生率较高。一项前瞻性随机试验旨在确定在因肝外门静脉阻塞导致食管静脉曲张出血的成人患者中,内镜下套扎术是否比硬化治疗更安全、更有效。
36例患者接受了硬化治疗,37例接受了套扎术。
套扎术和硬化治疗在实现静脉曲张根除方面同样有效(分别为94.6%和91.7%;p=0.67)。然而,套扎术通过较少的内镜检查次数(3.7[1.2]次对7.7[3.3]次;p<0.0001)和更短的时间间隔(50.1[17.7]天对99[54.8]天;p<0.0001)实现了根除。在套扎术组中,再出血频率较低(2.7%对19.4%;p=0.028;然而,多重检验的Bonferroni校正消除了这一显著性),主要并发症发生率较低(2.7%对22.2%;p=0.014)。硬化治疗组每位患者的总费用显著高于套扎术组(216.6[71.8]美元对182.6[63.4]美元;p=0.035)。在静脉曲张根除后的随访期间,硬化治疗组和套扎术组在再出血(3%对2.9%;p=1.0)、食管静脉曲张复发(9.1%对11.4%;p=1.0)和新胃静脉曲张形成(9.1%对14.3%;p=0.51)方面未发现显著差异。
静脉曲张套扎术优于硬化治疗,因为它成本更低,能更快地实现静脉曲张根除,且静脉曲张再出血和并发症的相对发生率更低。