Kong Yu, Shi Liang
Second Department of Gastroenterology, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou, Hebei 061001, P.R. China.
Endoscopy Division, Department of General Surgery, Cangzhou Central Hospital, Cangzhou, Hebei 061001, P.R. China.
Exp Ther Med. 2020 Jun;19(6):3479-3496. doi: 10.3892/etm.2020.8633. Epub 2020 Apr 1.
The purpose of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), endoscopic options, medications and mainstay combination therapies for patients with cirrhosis who have had at least one episode of variceal haemorrhage. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases, as well as the reference lists of relevant articles, were searched to identify eligible studies. P-scores, that were based solely on the point estimates and standard errors of the network estimates, were performed to rank all treatments, on a scale from 0 (worst) to 1 (best). The odds ratio (OR) was determined to assess effects on mortality, treatment failure and bleeding from gastroesophageal ulcers. A total of 43 randomized controlled trials comprising 3,787 adult patients were included. In total, 26 (61%) trials adopted concealed randomization, while most studies did not specify blinding. The drug combination of nadolol and isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN) ranked first for lowering risks of overall mortality (P-score=0.8162), mortality due to liver failure (P-score=0.7536) and bleeding from gastroesophageal ulcers (P-score=0.7536). This combination was determined to be superior to endoscopic sclerotherapy (ES) alone (OR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.42-0.94) and TIPS alone in reducing overall mortality (OR=0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.96). ES was more likely to increase treatment failure compared with TIPS, endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL), ES plus EVL, EVL plus nadolol/propranolol plus ISMN and nadolol/propranolol plus ISMN. In conclusion, the present network meta-analysis suggested that for a decreased mortality due to variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis, nadolol plus ISMN may be a preferable choice, while ES is associated with a higher risk of unfavourable treatment outcomes. Further well-controlled studies are required to further elucidate the appropriate treatment options.
本研究的目的是比较经颈静脉肝内门体分流术(TIPS)、内镜治疗、药物治疗以及主要联合治疗方案对至少发生过一次静脉曲张出血的肝硬化患者的疗效。检索了PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆和Web of Science数据库以及相关文章的参考文献列表,以确定符合条件的研究。仅基于网络估计的点估计值和标准误差计算P值,对所有治疗方法进行排序,范围从0(最差)到1(最佳)。确定比值比(OR)以评估对死亡率、治疗失败和胃食管溃疡出血的影响。总共纳入了43项随机对照试验,涉及3787名成年患者。总共有26项(61%)试验采用了隐蔽随机分组,而大多数研究未明确提及盲法。纳多洛尔和单硝酸异山梨酯(ISMN)的药物组合在降低总体死亡率(P值 = 0.8162)、肝功能衰竭导致的死亡率(P值 = 0.7536)和胃食管溃疡出血(P值 = 0.7536)风险方面排名第一。该组合在降低总体死亡率方面被确定优于单独的内镜硬化治疗(ES)(OR = 0.63,95%置信区间:0.42 - 0.94)和单独的TIPS(OR = 0.62,95%置信区间:0.40 - 0.96)。与TIPS、内镜下静脉曲张结扎术(EVL)、ES加EVL、EVL加纳多洛尔/普萘洛尔加ISMN以及纳多洛尔/普萘洛尔加ISMN相比,ES更有可能增加治疗失败的几率。总之,本次网状Meta分析表明,对于降低肝硬化患者静脉曲张再出血导致的死亡率,纳多洛尔加ISMN可能是更优选择,而ES与不良治疗结果的较高风险相关。需要进一步进行严格对照研究以进一步阐明合适的治疗方案。