No abstract

Summary Background Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is used for primary (PP) and secondary prophylaxis (SP) of variceal bleeding. Current guidelines recommend combined use of non‐selective beta‐blockers (NSBBs) and EBL for SP, while in PP either NSBB or EBL should be used. Aim To assess (re‐)bleeding rates and mortality in cirrhotic patients receiving EBL for PP or SP for variceal bleeding. Methods (Re‐)bleeding rates and mortality were retrospectively assessed with and without concomitant NSBB therapy after first EBL in PP and SP. Results Seven hundred and sixty‐six patients with oesophageal varices underwent EBL from 01/2005 to 06/2015. Among the 284 patients undergoing EBL for PP, n = 101 (35.6%) received EBL only, while n = 180 (63.4%) received EBL + NSBBs. In 482 patients on SP, n = 163 (33.8%) received EBL only, while n = 299 (62%) received EBL + NSBBs. In PP, concomitant NSBB therapy neither decreased bleeding rates (log‐rank: P = 0.353) nor mortality (log‐rank: P = 0.497) as compared to EBL alone. In SP, similar re‐bleeding rates were documented in EBL + NSBB vs EBL alone (log‐rank: P = 0.247). However, EBL + NSBB resulted in a significantly lower mortality rate (log‐rank: P<0.001). A decreased risk of death with EBL + NSBB in SP (hazard ratio, HR: 0.50; P<0.001) but not of rebleeding, transplantation or further decompensation was confirmed by competing risk analysis. Overall NSBB intake reduced 6‐months mortality (HR: 0.53, P = 0.008) in SP, which was most pronounced in patients without severe/refractory ascites (HR: 0.37; P = 0.001) but not observed in patients with severe/refractory ascites (HR: 0.80; P = 0.567). Conclusions EBL alone seems sufficient for PP of variceal bleeding. In SP, the addition of NSBB to EBL was associated with an improved survival within the first 6 months after EBL.

Objectives To develop and test the reliability of a new semiquantitative scoring system for the assessment of cartilage changes by ultrasound in a web-based exercise as well as a patient exercise of patients with RA. Methods A taskforce of the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Ultrasound Working Group performed a systematic literature review on the US assessment of cartilage in RA, followed by a Delphi survey on cartilage changes and a new semiquantitative US scoring system, and finally a web-based exercise as well as a patient exercise. For the web-based exercise, taskforce members scored a dataset of anonymized static images of MCP joints in RA patients and healthy controls, which also contained duplicate images. Subsequently, 12 taskforce members used the same US to score cartilage in MCP and proximal interphalangeal joints of six patients with RA in in a patient reliability exercise. Percentage agreement and prevalence of lesions were calculated, as intrareader reliability was assessed by weighted kappa and interreader reliability by Light’s kappa. Results The three-grade semiquantitative scoring system demonstrated excellent intrareader reliability (kappa: 0.87 and 0.83) in the web-based exercise and the patient exercise, respectively. Interreader reliability was good in the web-based exercise (kappa: 0.64) and moderate (kappa: 0.48) in the patient exercise. Conclusion Our study demonstrates that ultrasound is a reliable tool for evaluating cartilage changes in the MCP joints of patients with RA and supports further development of a new reliable semiquantitative ultrasound scoring system for evaluating cartilage involvement in RA.

No abstract

No abstract