2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2013.05.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

EUS-guided coil versus cyanoacrylate therapy for the treatment of gastric varices: a multicenter study (with videos)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

7
229
3
13

Year Published

2014
2014
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 202 publications
(257 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
7
229
3
13
Order By: Relevance
“…[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Fig. 3 illustrate GV obliteration by EUSguided CYA injection with Doppler monitoring.…”
Section: Eus-guided Therapy Of Gastroesophageal and Ectopic Varicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Fig. 3 illustrate GV obliteration by EUSguided CYA injection with Doppler monitoring.…”
Section: Eus-guided Therapy Of Gastroesophageal and Ectopic Varicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] In general, a 19 G or 22 G standard EUS needle can be used for EUSguided intravascular puncture of the target varices. [10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Tissue adhesives in the form of CYA (e.g., N-butyl-2-CYA, 2-Octyl-CYA) with or without lipiodol, or sclerosing agents (e.g., ethanolamine) have been used for EUS-guided injection therapy of gastroesoph- A B ageal varices.…”
Section: Eus-guided Therapy Of Gastroesophageal and Ectopic Varicesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…A comparison of EUS-guided variceal obliteration to rubber-band ligation has not been reported. The efficacy of EUS-guided coil vs. cyanoacrylate therapy has been compared in consecutive patients with gastric varices in a non-randomized study where EUS-guided coil application required fewer endoscopies and reported fewer adverse events compared with EUS-guided cyanoacrylate injection [64]. Experience from this study and case series indicates that the EUS-guided technique is effective in reducing the amount of glue injected but does not completely eliminate the risk of glue embolization.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%