Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Objective: to compare the efficacy of azygoportal disconnection (APD) surgery and a combination between endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) and non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding (RVB). To compare the incidence of gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) after these manipulations in patients with decompensated cirrhosis waitlisted for liver transplantation (LTx).Materials and methods. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis underwent RVB prophylaxis by APD surgery or by a combination of EVL and NSBBs.Results. There were no significant differences in clinical, laboratory, demographic parameters, MELD-Na and Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) scores, and frequencies of medium- and large-sized varicose veins among subgroups of patients with different RVB prophylaxis methods Patients with decompensated cirrhosis who underwent APD surgery did not experience any RVB episodes during the LTx waiting period, which lasted two years from the start of bleeding prophylaxis. In the same period, RVB occurred in 100% of cases in the EVL plus NSBBs group. Using the Kaplan–Meier method with the Log-Rank test, a significant difference (p = 0.0001) was found between the proportions of non-RVB patients in the APD and EVL + NSBBs groups. In the meantime, 48.1% of patients who had APD surgery developed GVB, while 100% of cases in EVL + NSBBs group did not. The Kaplan–Meier method with the Log-Rank test revealed a significant difference (p = 0.0001) between the proportion of non-GVB patients in EVL + NSBBs and APD groups.
Objective: to compare the efficacy of azygoportal disconnection (APD) surgery and a combination between endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) and non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding (RVB). To compare the incidence of gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) after these manipulations in patients with decompensated cirrhosis waitlisted for liver transplantation (LTx).Materials and methods. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis underwent RVB prophylaxis by APD surgery or by a combination of EVL and NSBBs.Results. There were no significant differences in clinical, laboratory, demographic parameters, MELD-Na and Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) scores, and frequencies of medium- and large-sized varicose veins among subgroups of patients with different RVB prophylaxis methods Patients with decompensated cirrhosis who underwent APD surgery did not experience any RVB episodes during the LTx waiting period, which lasted two years from the start of bleeding prophylaxis. In the same period, RVB occurred in 100% of cases in the EVL plus NSBBs group. Using the Kaplan–Meier method with the Log-Rank test, a significant difference (p = 0.0001) was found between the proportions of non-RVB patients in the APD and EVL + NSBBs groups. In the meantime, 48.1% of patients who had APD surgery developed GVB, while 100% of cases in EVL + NSBBs group did not. The Kaplan–Meier method with the Log-Rank test revealed a significant difference (p = 0.0001) between the proportion of non-GVB patients in EVL + NSBBs and APD groups.
Introduction. Compression hemostasis is widely used to arrest bleeding from veins of the esophagus in portal hypertension. Since it has a number of severe drawbacks, research is relevant to develop new approaches to solve this problem.The aim of the study was to provide evidence and develop a technique to arrest bleeding from varicose veins of the esophagus, which can become an alternative to compression hemostasis.Materials and methods. The key technology in the study was chemical-mechanical hemostasis – the combined esophageal vein compression and Hemoblock application. At the first stage, this technique was tested on laboratory animals - domestic pigs, since a model of the esophageal vein bleeding was formed in their bodies. At the clinical stage, chemical-mechanical hemostasis was performed in 15 patients with the recurrent esophageal vein bleeding; they made up the experimental group. The control group consisted of 15 patients subjected to compression hemostasis. The hemostatic effectiveness of the techniques and their assessment by the patients themselves were compared in the study.Results. In the experimental group, bleeding was arrested in 46.7% of cases by installing a probe for chemical-mechanical hemostasis with a 5-minute exposure. In the control group, bleeding was arrested in 66.7% of cases by installing an obturator probe with a 10- to 24-hour exposure. As patients’ survey reported, in the control group, patients experienced pain during the insertion of the obturator probe in 86.7% of cases, and 20% of patients experienced pain during the entire time the obturator probe was in the esophagus; 93.3% of patients expected an early termination of the procedure, 13.3% claimed that they would never agree to the procedure again. As patients’ survey reported, in the experimental group, 6.7% of patients experienced pain when inserting the probe for chemical-mechanical hemostasis and during the time, it remained in the body. 46.7% of patients wanted the procedure to be terminated as soon as possible. There were no patients who refused to repeat a procedure of chemical-mechanical hemostasis if required.Conclusions. The study demonstrated that a modified conventional obturator probe, which allowed combining compression of the esophageal veins with the hemostatic drug effect, resulted in a significantly increased hemostatic effect in case of the esophageal vein bleeding. During the study, this technique prevented 46.7% of patients from the need to use an obturator probe. Since the obturator probe, when applied, causes a large number of troublesome and painful sensations (a fact reported by 93.3% of patients), even its partial elimination can be considered as an option improving the quality of the treatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.