Use of endoscopic band ligation alone and in combination with nonselective beta blockers for prevention of variceal bleeding in ascites patients on the liver transplant waiting list

V. L. Korobka, V. D. Pasetchnikov, R. V. Korobka, E. Pak, A. Shapovalov
{"title":"Use of endoscopic band ligation alone and in combination with nonselective beta blockers for prevention of variceal bleeding in ascites patients on the liver transplant waiting list","authors":"V. L. Korobka, V. D. Pasetchnikov, R. V. Korobka, E. Pak, A. Shapovalov","doi":"10.15825/1995-1191-2022-3-42-50","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: to conduct a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of two methods - endoscopic band ligation (EBL) alone and in combination with nonselective beta blockers (NSBB) - used for prevention of variceal bleeding (VB); to evaluate their impact on patient survival in severe ascites during long-term stay on the liver transplant waiting list (LTWL).Materials and methods. A retrospective comparative study of two groups of patients with decompensated liver disease, ascites and varices included in the LTWL, who received EBL (n = 41, group 1) and EBL + NSBB (n = 45, group 2).Results. The groups being compared did not differ in demographics, clinical parameters, MELD and Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores. There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe ascites, particularly diuretic-resistant ascites. The study groups did not differ in the incidence of medium-and large-sized varices. Incidence of bleeding did not differ in both groups. Overall mortality was significantly higher in the EBL + NSBB group than in the EBL group. Patient survival was lower, while mortality was higher in the EBL + NSBB group. The combined therapy group had a significantly higher number of acute kidney injury (AKI) than the EBL group.Conclusion. The compared methods are equivalently effective in preventing VB in patients with decompensated cirrhosis with a prolonged stay on the waiting list. Survival rate is significantly lower, while mortality is significantly higher in the EBL + NSBB group than in the EBL group.","PeriodicalId":21400,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Russian Journal of Transplantology and Artificial Organs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15825/1995-1191-2022-3-42-50","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective: to conduct a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of two methods - endoscopic band ligation (EBL) alone and in combination with nonselective beta blockers (NSBB) - used for prevention of variceal bleeding (VB); to evaluate their impact on patient survival in severe ascites during long-term stay on the liver transplant waiting list (LTWL).Materials and methods. A retrospective comparative study of two groups of patients with decompensated liver disease, ascites and varices included in the LTWL, who received EBL (n = 41, group 1) and EBL + NSBB (n = 45, group 2).Results. The groups being compared did not differ in demographics, clinical parameters, MELD and Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores. There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe ascites, particularly diuretic-resistant ascites. The study groups did not differ in the incidence of medium-and large-sized varices. Incidence of bleeding did not differ in both groups. Overall mortality was significantly higher in the EBL + NSBB group than in the EBL group. Patient survival was lower, while mortality was higher in the EBL + NSBB group. The combined therapy group had a significantly higher number of acute kidney injury (AKI) than the EBL group.Conclusion. The compared methods are equivalently effective in preventing VB in patients with decompensated cirrhosis with a prolonged stay on the waiting list. Survival rate is significantly lower, while mortality is significantly higher in the EBL + NSBB group than in the EBL group.
使用内窥镜带结扎单独和联合非选择性受体阻滞剂预防肝移植等待名单上的腹水患者的静脉曲张出血
目的:比较分析内镜下带状结扎术(EBL)单独和联合非选择性受体阻滞剂(NSBB)预防静脉曲张出血(VB)的效果;评估它们对长期肝移植等待名单(LTWL)中严重腹水患者生存的影响。材料和方法。回顾性比较两组纳入LTWL的失代偿性肝病、腹水和静脉曲张患者,分别接受EBL (n = 41,组1)和EBL + NSBB (n = 45,组2)。被比较的两组在人口统计学、临床参数、MELD和child - turcote - pugh评分方面没有差异。严重腹水,特别是利尿剂抵抗性腹水的发生率无显著差异。研究小组在中、大静脉曲张发生率上没有差异。两组的出血发生率无差异。EBL + NSBB组的总死亡率明显高于EBL组。EBL + NSBB组患者生存率较低,死亡率较高。联合治疗组急性肾损伤(AKI)发生率明显高于EBL组。所比较的方法在预防失代偿性肝硬化患者的VB方面同样有效,并且在等候名单上停留时间较长。EBL + NSBB组的生存率明显低于EBL组,而死亡率明显高于EBL组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信