Endoscopic Injection Sclerotherapy Group Research Articles

Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for treating recurrent bleeding of small bowel angioectasias

BackgroundThere is still no consensus on the preferred endoscopic therapy for small bowel angioectasias (SBAs). The aim of this study was to evaluate effectiveness and safety of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) for treating recurrent bleeding of SBAs.MethodsSixty-six adult patients diagnosed with SBAs by capsule endoscopy (CE) or double-balloon enterscopy (DBE) examinations were enrolled in this retrospective study from September 2013 to September 2021. The patients were divided into an EIS group (35 cases) and a control group (31 cases) according to whether they underwent EIS treatment. Clinical characteristics, medical histories, lesion characteristics, main laboratory indicators, treatments, and outcomes were collected. The rates of re-bleeding, re-admission, and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion were compared between different groups after discharge. The rates of hospitalization and RBC transfusion were compared between before admission and after discharge in both groups. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used in the multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess relative factors for re-bleeding.ResultsAll the rates of re-bleeding, re-admission and RBC transfusion after discharge in the EIS group were significantly lower than those in the control group (all P < 0.05). The rates of hospitalization and RBC transfusion after discharge were significantly lower than those before admission in the EIS group (both P < 0.05), while those did not reach significant differences in the control group (both P > 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that RBC transfusion before admission (OR, 5.655; 95% CI, 1.007–31.758, P = 0.049) and multiple lesions (≥ 3) (OR, 17.672; 95% CI, 2.246–139.060, P = 0.006) were significant risk factors of re-bleeding, while EIS treatment (OR, 0.037; 95% CI, 0.005–0.260, P < 0.001) was a significant protective factor. No endoscopic adverse events were observed during hospitalization and none of the enrolled patients died within 12 months after discharge.ConclusionEIS treatment had good effectiveness and safety for treating recurrent bleeding of SBAs, which could be considered as one of the first-line endoscopic treatment options for SBAs.

Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy improves liver function compared with endoscopic variceal ligation

Liver function is a most important prognostic factor in patients with liver cirrhosis. Also, portal hypertension is a fatal complication of liver cirrhosis and variceal treatment is indispensable. However, changes of liver functions after endoscopic variceal treatments are unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate prognosis and liver functions after endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). A total of liver cirrhotic 103 patients who underwent prophylactic EIS and EVL were enrolled. Overall survival rate was higher in EIS group than EVL group (p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis showed that EIS was a negative factor for death (HR: 0.46, 95% confidence interval: 0.24–0.88, p = 0.02). Liver functions were assessed by blood test taken at before and 3 months after treatment. In EIS group, albumin and prothrombin time improved (p < 0.01), leading to improvement of Child–Pugh score, ALBI score and MELD score (p < 0.05). However, these did not improve in EVL group. EIS was a significant factor related to the elevated value of albumin after treatment in linear regression analysis (estimated regression coefficient: 0.17, 95% confidence interval: 0.05–0.29, p = 0.005). These results revealed that EIS could improve liver functions and prognosis.

Esophageal Variceal Ligation Monotherapy versus Combined Ligation and Sclerotherapy for the Treatment of Esophageal Varices.

Currently, endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) monotherapy is the standard therapy for managing esophageal variceal hemorrhage. Patients generally need several sessions of endoscopy to achieve optimal variceal ablation, and the varices can recur afterward. Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) is an older technique, associated with certain complications. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of EVL alone versus combined EVL and EIS in the treatment of esophageal varices. This retrospective study included 84 patients, of which 40 patients were treated with EVL monotherapy and 44 patients were treated with combined EVL + EIS. The main outcomes were rebleeding rates, recurrence at six months, number of treatment sessions, length of hospital stay, cost of hospitalization, and procedural complications. At six months, the rebleeding rate and recurrence were significantly lower in the EVL + EIS group compared to the EVL group (2.3% versus 15.0%; and 9.1% versus 27.5%, respectively). The number of treatment sessions, length of hospital stay, and cost of hospitalization were significantly lower in the EVL + EIS group compared to those in the EVL group (2.3 ± 0.6 versus 3.2 ± 0.8 times; 14.5 ± 3.4 versus 23.5 ± 5.9 days; and 23918.6 ± 4220.4 versus 26165.2 ± 4765.1 renminbi, respectively). Chest pain was significantly lower in the EVL + EIS group compared to that in the EVL group (15.9% versus 45.0%). There were no statistically significant differences in the presence of fever or esophageal stricture in both groups. In conclusion, combined EVL + EIS showed less rebleeding rates and recurrence at six months and less chest pain and was more cost effective compared to EVL alone in the treatment of gastroesophageal varices.

Effects of diabetes on the rebleeding rate following endoscopic treatment in patients with liver cirrhosis.

In the present study, the effects of diabetes on rebleeding following endoscopic treatment were assessed in patients with liver cirrhosis. A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) or endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) at the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University (Hefei, China) between June 2015 and March 2018 was performed. The patients were divided into the EVL and the EIS groups and each group was subdivided into diabetic and non-diabetic groups. The post-operative rebleeding rate was compared between the EVL and the EIS groups and between the diabetic and non-diabetic patients. The differences in the post-operative rebleeding rate of diabetic patients with hepatogenic and non-hepatogenic diabetes and in patients with different liver function grades were also determined. In the total patient cohort, the rebleeding rate in the EVL subgroup (11.3, 16.5 and 23.5%) was not significantly different compared with that in the EIS subgroup (9.8, 17.4 and 29.3%) at 1, 3 and 6 months following surgery, respectively (P=0.724, 0.868 and 0.339). In the total diabetic group, the rebleeding rate in the EVL subgroup (25.0, 36.1 and 44.4%) was not significantly different compared with that in the EIS subgroup (20.6, 32.4 and 47.1%) at 1, 3 and 6 months following surgery (P=0.660, 0.741 and 0.826, respectively). In the EVL group, the rebleeding rate in the diabetic subgroup (25.0, 36.1 and 44.4%) was higher than that in the non-diabetic subgroup (5.1, 7.6 and 13.9%) at 1, 3, and 6 months following surgery and the differences were significant (P=0.005, <0.001 and <0.001, respectively). In the EIS group, the rebleeding rate in the diabetic subgroup (20.6, 32.4 and 47.1%) was significantly higher than that in the non-diabetic subgroup (3.4, 8.6 and 19.0%) at 1, 3 and 6 months following surgery (P=0.021, 0.004 and 0.004, respectively). Adjustment for age and liver function grade in the EVL and EIS groups was performed using binary logistic regression and the parameter diabetes was indicated to be a risk factor for post-operative rebleeding (P<0.05). No significant difference was noted in the rate of rebleeding between patients with hepatogenic diabetes and non-hepatogenic diabetes at 1, 3 and 6 months following surgery (P=0.634, 0.726 and 0.446, respectively). In the total diabetic group, the rebleeding rate in the Child-Pugh grade A subgroup (14.3, 17.9 and 25.0%) was lower than that in the Child-Pugh grade B/C subgroup (28.6, 45.2 and 59.5%) at 1, 3 and 6 months following surgery, respectively. No significant difference was noted between the two groups at 1 month following surgery (P=0.163). However, the differences were significant at 3 and 6 months following surgery (P=0.018 and 0.005, respectively). The results suggested that diabetes is a risk factor for post-operative rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis. Diabetic patients with poor liver function were more likely to bleed following surgery and the post-operative bleeding rate was not significantly different between patients with hepatogenic and non-hepatogenic diabetes. The study was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (no. ChiCTR1800017772).

Endoscopic variceal ligation compared with endoscopic injection sclerotherapy for treatment of esophageal variceal hemorrhage: a meta-analysis.

To compare the effect of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with that of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) in the treatment of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding. We performed a systematic literature search of multiple online electronic databases. Meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of combined studies for the treatment of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding between EVL and EIS. Fourteen studies comprising 1236 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The rebleeding rate in actively bleeding varices patients in the EVL group was significantly lower than that in the EIS group (RR=0.68, 95%CI: 0.57-0.81). The variceal eradication rate in actively bleeding varices patients in the EVL group was significantly higher than that in the EIS group (RR=1.06, 95%CI: 1.01-1.12). There was no significant difference about mortality rate between the EVL group and EIS group (RR=0.95, 95%CI: 0.77-1.17). The rate of complications in actively bleeding varices patients in the EVL group was significantly lower than that in the EIS group (RR=0.28, 95%CI: 0.13-0.58). Our meta-analysis has found that EVL is better than EIS in terms of the lower rates of rebleeding, complications, and the higher rate of variceal eradication. Therefore, EVL is the first choice for esophageal variceal bleeding.

Merits of prophylactic sclerotherapy for esophageal varices concomitant unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: Prospective randomized study

Several clinical studies of prophylactic therapy for esophageal varices have led to the conclusion that prophylactic therapy is of no value, and it is generally not accepted in the Western world. However, this is not the case in Japan. The present study evaluated the efficacy of prophylactic endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and risky esophageal varices. Twenty-seven patients with 'likely-to-bleed' esophageal varices concomitant with unresectable HCC were randomly allocated to two groups. Thirteen patients underwent prophylactic EIS (EIS group), whereas the remaining 14 patients were observed conservatively (control group). No bleeding from esophageal varices occurred in the EIS group during the entire period of this study, whereas in thecontrol group the cumulative bleeding rate was 44.8% in 6 months. Cumulative survival rates of patients in the EIS group and in the control group were 48.8% and 7.7% in 2 years, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in cumulative bleeding rate and survival rate (P < 0.01). This prospective study demonstrated that prophylactic EIS could prolong the survival of the patients with esophageal varices concomitant with unresectable HCC. Prophylactic EIS for patients with unresectable HCC may be, in part, justified according to the present study.

A prospective randomised comparative study of endoscopic band ligation versus injection sclerotherapy of bleeding internal haemorrhoids in patients with liver cirrhosis

Background and study aimsBleeding internal haemorrhoids are common and used to be treated surgically with too many complications. Endoscopic therapy is trying to take the lead. Sclerotherapy and rubber band ligation are the candidates to replace surgical therapy especially in patients with liver cirrhosis. The aim of this study was to compare endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) to endoscopic rubber band ligation (EBL) regarding effectiveness and complications in the treatment of bleeding internal haemorrhoids in Egyptian patients with liver cirrhosis. Patients and methodsOne hundred and twenty adult patients with liver cirrhosis and bleeding internal haemorrhoids were randomised into two equal groups; the first treated with EBL using Saeed multiband ligator, and the second with EIS using either ethanolamine oleate 5% or N-butyl cyanoacrylate. All groups were matched as regards age, sex, Child score and pre-procedure Doppler values. Patients were followed up clinically and with abdominal ultrasound/Doppler for 6months. Endoscopic and endosonography/Doppler was done before and one month after the procedure. Pre and post-procedure data were recorded and analysed. ResultsBoth techniques were highly effective in the control of bleeding from internal haemorrhoids with a low rebleeding [10% in the EBL group and 13.33% in the EIS group] and recurrence [20% in the EBL group 20% in the EIS group] rates. Child score had a positive correlation with rebleeding and recurrence in EIS group only.Pain score and need for analgesia were significantly higher while patient satisfaction was significantly lower in EIS compared to EBL [p<0.05]. No significant difference between ethanolamine and cyanoacrylate subgroups was found [p>0.05]. ConclusionsBoth EBL and EIS were effective in the treatment of bleeding internal haemorrhoids in patients with liver cirrhosis. EBL had significantly less pain and higher patient satisfaction than EIS. EBL was also safer in patients with advanced cirrhosis.

Does sclerotherapy of remnant little oesophageal varices after endoscopic ligation have impact on the reduction of recurrent varices?: Prospective study

Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is superior to endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) of oesophageal varices, however, EBL is associated with a higher rate of variceal recurrences. To examine whether the reduction of recurrent varices can be achieved by additional sclerotherapy of remnant little varices after ligation. Forty-eight patients with liver cirrhosis who had previously bled from oesophageal varices were examined. Endoscopic therapy was performed in order to prevent recurrent variceal bleeding. I group: in 23 patients ligation of oesophageal varices with multi band ligation device was applied (EBL group). II group: in 25 patients sclerotherapy using polydocanol or absolute alcohol was applied after reducing the size of varices using ligation (EBL and EIS group). There was no statistically significant difference between the examined groups of patients in relation to the number of sessions for variceal eradication, recurrence of variceal bleeding, deterioration of portal gastropathy and mortality in the observed period from 18.8 +/- 18.6 months (EBL group) and 22.2 +/- 26.2 months (EBL and EIS group). Variceal recurrence was verified in 21.7% of patients of the EBL group and 16% of the EBL and EIS group, but the difference was not statistically important. Several complications, such as dysphagia and chest pain, were statistically more frequent in the EBL and EIS group of patients. The combined method of ligation and extra sclerosing of remnant small oesophageal varices after ligation does not have advantage in relation to the ligation alone.

The value of the endoscopic therapies in the treatment of rectal varices: a retrospective comparison between injection sclerotherapy and band ligation

This study consisted of 15 patients who had undergone endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) or endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) for rectal varices. Ten of fifteen patients had histories of anal bleeding, and colonoscopy revealed signs of the risk of variceal rupture in the other five patients. EIS was perfomed in six of the fifteen patients, and the other nine patients underwent EVL. EIS was performed weekly from 2 to 4 times (mean, 3.0), and the total amount of sclerosant ranged from 3.2 to 5.8ml (mean, 4.9ml). After EIS, colonoscopy revealed shrinkage of the rectal varices in all six patients with no complications. EVL was performed weekly from 1 to 3 times (mean, 2.2), and bands were placed on the varices at 2-12 sites (mean, 8.0). After EVL, colonoscopy revealed both ulcers and shrinkage of the varices in the rectum in all nine patients. Eight of the nine experienced no operative complications. However, in the other case, colonoscopy revealed bleeding from ulcers after EVL. The average follow-up period after EIS or EVL was 30 months. The overall non-recurrence rate of rectal varices was 11 of 15 (73.3%); this includes five of the six patients (83.3%) receiving EIS and six of the nine who received EVL (66.7%). The non-recurrence rate was no difference between EIS group and EVL group statistically (P=0.57) by reason of small number of cases. In conclusion, EIS is some superior to EVL with regard to long-term effectiveness, complications on rectal varices.

Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy vs. endoscopic variceal ligation in arresting acute variceal bleeding for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and acute esophageal variceal bleeding have a very poor prognosis. To compare the efficacy and complications of sclerotherapy and banding ligation, patients with acute esophageal variceal bleeding and concomitant hepatocellular carcinoma were randomly allocated to receive either sclerotherapy (endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group, 27 patients) or banding ligation (endoscopic variceal ligation group, 30 patients). All patients received treatment within 24 h of index bleeding. Initial control of bleeding was achieved in 41% of the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group and 87% of the endoscopic variceal ligation group (p < 0.001). The re-bleeding rates were 73% and 42%, respectively (p < 0.05). The amount of blood transfused during the week after treatment was significantly higher in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy than in the endoscopic variceal ligation group (3.9 +/- 1.5 vs. 1.5 +/- 0.8 units, respectively) (p < 0.01). Major complications were more often encountered in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group (22%) than in the endoscopic variceal ligation group (3%) (p < 0.05). Twenty-three patients in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group and 25 patients in the endoscopic variceal ligation group have so far died. The mean survival was 25 +/- 16 days in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group and 49 +/- 14 days in the endoscopic variceal ligation group (p < 0.05). Variceal bleeding was the main cause of mortality in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group (70%), whereas in the endoscopic variceal ligation group, hepatic failure (48%), rather than variceal bleeding (28%), was the major cause.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Fatigue properties of brazed aluminium alloy joints: Sato, S., Sukimoto, M., Itonaga, S. and Honda, T. J. Jpn Inst. Light Met. (Sept. 1993) 43 (9), 478–483 (in Japanese)

Bleeding internal haemorrhoids are common and used to be treated surgically with too many complications. Endoscopic therapy is trying to take the lead. Sclerotherapy and rubber band ligation are the candidates to replace surgical therapy especially in patients with liver cirrhosis. The aim of this study was to compare endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) to endoscopic rubber band ligation (EBL) regarding effectiveness and complications in the treatment of bleeding internal haemorrhoids in Egyptian patients with liver cirrhosis.One hundred and twenty adult patients with liver cirrhosis and bleeding internal haemorrhoids were randomised into two equal groups; the first treated with EBL using Saeed multiband ligator, and the second with EIS using either ethanolamine oleate 5% or N-butyl cyanoacrylate. All groups were matched as regards age, sex, Child score and pre-procedure Doppler values. Patients were followed up clinically and with abdominal ultrasound/Doppler for 6 months. Endoscopic and endosonography/Doppler was done before and one month after the procedure. Pre and post-procedure data were recorded and analysed.Both techniques were highly effective in the control of bleeding from internal haemorrhoids with a low rebleeding [10% in the EBL group and 13.33% in the EIS group] and recurrence [20% in the EBL group 20% in the EIS group] rates. Child score had a positive correlation with rebleeding and recurrence in EIS group only.Pain score and need for analgesia were significantly higher while patient satisfaction was significantly lower in EIS compared to EBL [p < 0.05]. No significant difference between ethanolamine and cyanoacrylate subgroups was found [p > 0.05].Both EBL and EIS were effective in the treatment of bleeding internal haemorrhoids in patients with liver cirrhosis. EBL had significantly less pain and higher patient satisfaction than EIS. EBL was also safer in patients with advanced cirrhosis.

Sclerotherapy vs. esophageal transection vs. distal splenorenal shunt for the clinical management of esophageal varices in patients with child class A and B liver function: A prospective randomized trial

Ninety-six patients with good liver function (Child class A or B) and esophageal varices were randomly assigned to one of three groups given different treatments: endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (n = 32), esophageal transection (n = 32) or distal splenorenal shunt (n = 32). Five patients (5.2%) had to be excluded from this study because severe chronic pancreatitis made separation of the distal splenic vein from the pancreatic bed difficult. Esophageal transection was performed for these patients. No deaths occurred during the 30 days of treatment. The 5-yr cumulative bleeding rates were 0%, 5.9% and 12.9% in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy, esophageal transection and distal splenorenal shunt groups, respectively (no statistical significance). In no case in the three groups did death occur because of variceal bleeding. Sixteen patients died, mainly because of underlying liver disease; four were in the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy group, five were in the esophageal transection group and seven were in the distal splenorenal shunt group. No statistically significant difference in survival rate among the three groups was found. These results show that endoscopic injection sclerotherapy is a satisfactory alternative to esophageal transection or distal splenorenal shunt for the clinical management of patients with esophageal varices.

Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy versus conservative treatment for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma and bleeding esophageal varices

We performed endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) in the treatment of 37 patients with bleeding esophageal varices due to unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The results were compared with those in another 33 HCC patients treated only conservatively, without EIS, during the same period. A majority of both groups died within 3 weeks after treatment. Comparing the two groups, there was no significant difference in fatal bleeding (66% vs 75%), but significantly fewer of the EIS patients died of the index hemorrhage (43% vs. 83%; p less than 0.01). Also, in the absence of portal vein thrombosis, EIS significantly reduced the risk of fatal bleeding (31% vs. 73%; p less than 0.25). The mean days of survival were 32 +/- 15 (range, 2 to 320) in the EIS group and 10 +/- 14 (range, 2 to 270) in the compared group (p less than 0.001). We conclude that EIS provides temporary control of acute esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with unresectable HCC. The major factors contributing to EIS failure are the lethal propensity of the underlying disease and portal vein thrombosis.