Department of Gastroenterology, The Second Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, Zhejiang Province, China.
Department of Gastroenterology, Lishui Hospital of Zhejiang University, Lishui Municipal Central Hospital, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Lishui 32300, Zhejiang Province, China.
Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Mar 29;2021:8856048. doi: 10.1155/2021/8856048. eCollection 2021.
Currently, endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) monotherapy is the standard therapy for managing esophageal variceal hemorrhage. Patients generally need several sessions of endoscopy to achieve optimal variceal ablation, and the varices can recur afterward. Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) is an older technique, associated with certain complications. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of EVL alone versus combined EVL and EIS in the treatment of esophageal varices. This retrospective study included 84 patients, of which 40 patients were treated with EVL monotherapy and 44 patients were treated with combined EVL + EIS. The main outcomes were rebleeding rates, recurrence at six months, number of treatment sessions, length of hospital stay, cost of hospitalization, and procedural complications. At six months, the rebleeding rate and recurrence were significantly lower in the EVL + EIS group compared to the EVL group (2.3% versus 15.0%; and 9.1% versus 27.5%, respectively). The number of treatment sessions, length of hospital stay, and cost of hospitalization were significantly lower in the EVL + EIS group compared to those in the EVL group (2.3 ± 0.6 versus 3.2 ± 0.8 times; 14.5 ± 3.4 versus 23.5 ± 5.9 days; and 23918.6 ± 4220.4 versus 26165.2 ± 4765.1 renminbi, respectively). Chest pain was significantly lower in the EVL + EIS group compared to that in the EVL group (15.9% versus 45.0%). There were no statistically significant differences in the presence of fever or esophageal stricture in both groups. In conclusion, combined EVL + EIS showed less rebleeding rates and recurrence at six months and less chest pain and was more cost effective compared to EVL alone in the treatment of gastroesophageal varices.
目前,内镜下食管静脉曲张套扎术(EVL)单药治疗是管理食管静脉曲张出血的标准治疗方法。患者通常需要进行多次内镜检查才能达到最佳的静脉曲张消融效果,并且之后静脉曲张可能会复发。内镜下注射硬化疗法(EIS)是一种较老的技术,与某些并发症相关。本研究旨在评估 EVL 单药治疗与 EVL 联合 EIS 治疗食管静脉曲张的临床疗效。本回顾性研究纳入了 84 名患者,其中 40 名患者接受 EVL 单药治疗,44 名患者接受 EVL 联合 EIS 治疗。主要结局是再出血率、6 个月时的复发率、治疗次数、住院时间、住院费用和手术并发症。6 个月时,EVL 联合 EIS 组的再出血率和复发率明显低于 EVL 组(2.3%比 15.0%;9.1%比 27.5%)。EVL 联合 EIS 组的治疗次数、住院时间和住院费用明显低于 EVL 组(2.3±0.6 次比 3.2±0.8 次;14.5±3.4 天比 23.5±5.9 天;23918.6±4220.4 元人民币比 26165.2±4765.1 元人民币)。EVL 联合 EIS 组的胸痛发生率明显低于 EVL 组(15.9%比 45.0%)。两组发热或食管狭窄的发生率无统计学差异。总之,与 EVL 单药治疗相比,EVL 联合 EIS 在治疗胃食管静脉曲张时,6 个月时再出血率和复发率更低,胸痛发生率更低,且更具成本效益。