Suppr超能文献

内镜下静脉曲张套扎术与内镜下静脉曲张套扎术联合内镜下硬化治疗:一项前瞻性随机研究。

Endoscopic variceal ligation versus endoscopic variceal ligation and endoscopic sclerotherapy: a prospective randomized study.

作者信息

Bhargava D K, Pokharna R

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi.

出版信息

Am J Gastroenterol. 1997 Jun;92(6):950-3.

PMID:9177508
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with a combination of EVL and endoscopic scelerotherapy (EST) in the secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding.

METHODS

Fifty patients with esophageal varices due to cirrhosis of the liver (38), noncirrhotic portal fibrosis (7), or extrahepatic portal venous obstruction (5) were included in the study. These 50 patients were randomized to receive either EVL alone or a combination of EVL and EST for variceal eradication. Twenty-one patients received EVL alone (group A), and 23 patients received EVL and EST (group B). In group B, EVLs were performed until the varices were reduced to grade II size, and, subsequently, these patients underwent low-dose sclerotherapy with 1% polidocanol until variceal eradication was achieved.

RESULTS

Combined EVL and EST treatment eradicated the varices in a significantly greater number of patients then EVL alone (87% vs. 24%; p < 0.05). However, significantly more endoscopic sessions were required with combined treatment than with EVL alone (5.87 +/- 2.32 vs. 4.28 +/- 1.82; p < 0.05). Rebleeding episodes before variceal eradication were similar in the two groups (19% vs. 22%). The complications were similar in both the EVL and the EVL-plus-EST group, ie., deep ulcers (16% vs. 20%), transient dysphagia (20% vs. 32%), and stricture (4% vs. 8%).

CONCLUSION

Thus, combined EVL and EST treatment eradicates varices in a significantly larger number of patients than EVL alone, with no extra complications.

摘要

目的

比较内镜下静脉曲张套扎术(EVL)与EVL联合内镜下硬化治疗(EST)用于食管静脉曲张出血二级预防的效果。

方法

本研究纳入50例因肝硬化(38例)、非肝硬化性门脉纤维化(7例)或肝外门静脉阻塞(5例)导致食管静脉曲张的患者。这50例患者被随机分为两组,分别接受单纯EVL或EVL联合EST以消除静脉曲张。21例患者接受单纯EVL(A组),23例患者接受EVL联合EST(B组)。在B组中,先进行EVL直至静脉曲张缩小至II级大小,随后这些患者接受1%聚多卡醇低剂量硬化治疗直至静脉曲张消除。

结果

与单纯EVL相比,EVL联合EST治疗消除静脉曲张的患者数量显著更多(87%对24%;p<0.05)。然而,联合治疗所需的内镜检查次数显著多于单纯EVL(5.87±2.32对4.28±1.82;p<0.05)。两组在静脉曲张消除前的再出血发生率相似(19%对22%)。EVL组和EVL加EST组的并发症相似,即深度溃疡(16%对20%)、短暂性吞咽困难(20%对32%)和狭窄(4%对8%)。

结论

因此,与单纯EVL相比,EVL联合EST治疗能使更多患者的静脉曲张消除,且无额外并发症。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验