Burke Eoghan, Harkins Patricia, Arumugasamy Mayilone
Surgery, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, IRL.
Medicine, Royal College of Physicians in Ireland, Dublin, IRL.
Cureus. 2024 Nov 12;16(11):e73517. doi: 10.7759/cureus.73517. eCollection 2024 Nov.
Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) continues to challenge physicians and healthcare systems. Despite significant advances in our multimodal approach to managing this problem, namely medical, endoscopic, and radiological techniques, the mortality rates for this patient cohort remain as high as 20% on the index admission. This mortality rate has remained unchanged over the past 25 years. A crucial tool in the management of AVB is the balloon tamponade technique. However, this is associated with numerous severe and potentially life-threatening adverse events. Due to the limitations of oesophageal balloon tamponade devices, there has been an increased interest in using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) to manage refractory variceal bleeding. There is a base of experience in using SEMS derived from their use in managing malignant obstructions. This study aimed to synthesise all available evidence, for the first time, on using SEMS to manage refractory oesophageal AVB. This study was a systematic review of published papers, which is reported per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We identified 16 suitable studies for review. These comprised one randomised controlled trial comparing SEMS to balloon tamponade, one prospective cohort study, nine retrospective cohort studies, four case reports, and one case series. In total, 246 patients were included. An average survival rate of 49% was seen among the 11 studies that reported a six-week survival rate; this included a cohort of 225 patients. The SEMS were left in situ for an average of 7.5 days, with a maximum average of 18 days in one study. The average rate for controlling the acute bleeding episode in patients receiving a SEMS was 96%. The re-bleeding rate on the removal of SEMS was 5%, far superior to the widely reported 50% re-bleeding rate for the balloon tamponade technique. The adverse event profile for the SEMS appears superior to the balloon tamponade technique overall. The rate of stent-related adverse events in patients receiving a SEMS was 25%. The most common adverse events were technical issues related to stent functioning, namely stent migration. The most severe stent-related adverse event was compression of the left main bronchus in two cases, which required the removal of the stent. Our study has several limitations, which we have alluded to throughout the paper. The studies on this issue are of poor quality, with only one randomised controlled trial performed. As a result, we must interpret the results of our research with caution. Our study supports the use of SEMS in managing AVB as a promising area of research. We have highlighted that further well-designed randomised controlled trials are needed to assess the efficacy of this technique, ideally compared directly to the balloon tamponade technique. However, based on this systematic review, the current body of evidence would suggest that the SEMS is superior to the balloon tamponade technique in terms of adverse event profile, re-bleeding rate, and length of time the device can safely be left in situ. Current evidence suggests that SEMS are as effective at controlling acute bleeding episodes as the balloon tamponade technique.
急性静脉曲张出血(AVB)仍然是医生和医疗系统面临的挑战。尽管我们在处理这一问题的多模式方法(即医学、内镜和放射技术)方面取得了重大进展,但该患者群体在首次入院时的死亡率仍高达20%。在过去25年中,这一死亡率一直保持不变。AVB管理中的一个关键工具是气囊压迫技术。然而,这与许多严重且可能危及生命的不良事件相关。由于食管气囊压迫装置的局限性,人们对使用自膨式金属支架(SEMS)来处理难治性静脉曲张出血的兴趣日益增加。在管理恶性梗阻方面使用SEMS积累了一定的经验基础。本研究旨在首次综合所有关于使用SEMS处理难治性食管AVB的现有证据。本研究是对已发表论文的系统评价,按照系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)声明进行报告。我们确定了16项适合进行综述的研究。这些研究包括一项比较SEMS与气囊压迫的随机对照试验、一项前瞻性队列研究、九项回顾性队列研究、四项病例报告和一项病例系列。总共纳入了246例患者。在报告了六周生存率的11项研究中,平均生存率为49%;这包括一组225例患者。SEMS平均留置原位7.5天,在一项研究中最长平均为18天。接受SEMS的患者控制急性出血发作的平均率为96%。SEMS取出后的再出血率为5%,远优于广泛报道的气囊压迫技术50%的再出血率。总体而言,SEMS的不良事件情况似乎优于气囊压迫技术。接受SEMS的患者中与支架相关的不良事件发生率为25%。最常见的不良事件是与支架功能相关的技术问题,即支架移位。最严重的与支架相关的不良事件是两例左主支气管受压,需要取出支架。我们的研究有几个局限性,我们在整篇论文中都有所提及。关于这个问题的研究质量较差,仅进行了一项随机对照试验。因此,我们必须谨慎解释我们的研究结果。我们的研究支持将SEMS用于AVB管理,这是一个有前景的研究领域。我们强调需要进一步设计良好的随机对照试验来评估该技术的疗效,理想情况下直接与气囊压迫技术进行比较。然而,基于这项系统评价,目前的证据表明,在不良事件情况、再出血率以及装置可安全留置原位的时间长度方面,SEMS优于气囊压迫技术。目前的证据表明,SEMS在控制急性出血发作方面与气囊压迫技术一样有效。