Department of Interventional Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Fenglin Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200032, No, China.
Department of Interventional Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University (Xiamen Branch), Xiamen, 361015, China.
Abdom Radiol (NY). 2024 Feb;49(2):597-603. doi: 10.1007/s00261-023-04101-x. Epub 2023 Nov 23.
This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of endovascular managements, including splenic vein recanalization (SVR), partial splenic embolization (PSE), and percutaneous transsplenic gastric varices embolization combined with PSE (PSE+GVE), for management of SPH-related variceal hemorrhage (VH).
A total of 61 patients with SPH-related VH from three hospitals were enrolled and classified into three groups: the SVR group (Group 1, n=24), the PSE+GVE group (Group 2, n=17), and the PSE group (Group 3, n=20). Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared among the groups.
The technical success rates for transhepatic and transsplenic SVR were 27.8% and 34.6%, respectively. No major complications were observed during any of the procedures. The median follow-up period was 53.2 months. The 2-year GI rebleeding rates for Group 1, 2, and 3 were 0%, 5.9%, and 35%, respectively. Groups 1 and 2 have a lower GI rebleeding rate (p = 0.002, p = 0.048, respectively) and better results of the degree of GV (p = 0.003, p = 0.044, respectively) compared to Group 3. No significant differences were found in 2-year GI rebleeding rates and the degree of GV between Group 1 and 2 (p = 0.415, p = 0.352, respectively).
SVR, PSE+GVE, and PSE seem safe and effective for management of SPH-related VH. SVR appears to be the superior treatment option. Transsplenic access may further increase the SVR success rate. PSE+GVE seems to have comparable outcomes in GV control and GI rebleeding rates compared to SVR, while superior to PSE.
本研究旨在评估包括脾静脉再通术(SVR)、部分性脾栓塞术(PSE)和经皮经脾胃静脉曲张栓塞联合 PSE(PSE+GVE)在内的血管内治疗方法用于治疗 SPH 相关静脉曲张出血(VH)的安全性和有效性。
共纳入三家医院的 61 例 SPH 相关 VH 患者,分为三组:SVR 组(组 1,n=24)、PSE+GVE 组(组 2,n=17)和 PSE 组(组 3,n=20)。比较三组患者的基线特征和临床结局。
经肝和经脾 SVR 的技术成功率分别为 27.8%和 34.6%。在任何手术过程中均未观察到重大并发症。中位随访时间为 53.2 个月。组 1、2 和 3 的 2 年 GI 再出血率分别为 0%、5.9%和 35%。组 1 和 2 的 GI 再出血率较低(p=0.002,p=0.048),GV 程度改善较好(p=0.003,p=0.044),与组 3 相比差异有统计学意义。组 1 和 2 之间的 2 年 GI 再出血率和 GV 程度差异无统计学意义(p=0.415,p=0.352)。
SVR、PSE+GVE 和 PSE 似乎可安全有效地用于治疗 SPH 相关 VH。SVR 似乎是更优的治疗选择。经脾入路可能进一步提高 SVR 成功率。与 SVR 相比,PSE+GVE 在控制 GV 和 GI 再出血率方面具有相似的效果,但优于 PSE。