Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided coil deployment with and without cyanoacrylate injection for gastric varices.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Gastric variceal bleeding is more severe than esophageal variceal bleeding, and is associated with higher rebleeding and mortality rates. The benefits of endoscopic ultrasound-guided coil deployment alone for treating gastric varices, compared with concomitant cyanoacrylate injection, remain unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the outcomes of both modalities.

PATIENTS AND

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided coil deployment with/without concomitant cyanoacrylate injection for gastric varices between 2010 and 2021 were reviewed. The rates of rebleeding, reintervention, and survival were assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (mean age, 55.9 ± 12.9 years; 17 men) underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided coil deployment, either alone (EUS-coil) (n = 19) or with cyanoacrylate injection (EUS-coil/CYA) (n = 9), to treat cardiofundal varices. Among the 20 patients treated for secondary prophylaxis, including 3 actively bleeding patients (11 via EUS-coil, 9 with EUS-coil/CYA), no significant differences were observed in the rates of rebleeding (1 vs. 2), reintervention (1 vs. 0) or adverse events (1 vs. 1) (all P > 0.05). The 6-month, 1-year, and 3-year overall survival rates did not differ between the treatment groups (crude survival ratio: 76.9% vs. 77.8%; survival rates: 0.923, 0.682, and 0.615 vs. 0.778 for each year; log-rank = 0.227; P = 0.633). In patients treated for primary prophylaxis (n = 8; all via EUS-coil alone), no bleeding episodes were observed after 433 days of follow-up; however, one patient required reintervention for the reappearance of varices without bleeding.

CONCLUSION

EUS-coil alone was not inferior to EUS-coil/CYA combination concerning rebleeding, reintervention, or survival.