Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 1999
Sclerotherapy plus ligation versus ligation for the treatment of esophageal varices: a prospective randomized study.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Umehara M, Onda M, Tajiri T, Toba M, Yoshida H, Yamashita K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We devised a new combined method of endoscopic variceal ligation and injection sclerotherapy, namely, endoscopic scleroligation, for the treatment of esophageal varices. The aim of this prospective randomized trial was to compare endoscopic scleroligation with endoscopic variceal ligation alone with regard to efficacy, complications, variceal recurrence, and survival.
METHODS: Fifty-one patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices were randomly assigned to be treated by endoscopic scleroligation (n = 25) or endoscopic variceal ligation (n = 26). In the initial session in the endoscopic scleroligation group, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy was performed with injection of 5% ethanolamine oleate around the lower esophagus to obliterate the feeding veins. This was followed by endoscopic variceal ligation from the injection site to the most orad varix. In subsequent sessions, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy was performed with 1% polidocanol. In the endoscopic variceal ligation group, that procedure was performed in all treatment sessions.
RESULTS: Both methods were equally effective in achieving complete eradication of esophageal varices. Among the cases in which complete eradication was achieved, the 1- and 3-year cumulative recurrence rates in the endoscopic scleroligation group (9.5%, 22.1%) were significantly lower than those in the endoscopic variceal ligation group (61.9%, 72.2%) (p < 0.01). The survival rates and incidences of treatment-related complications have been similar among patients treated by both methods.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic scleroligation is superior to endoscopic variceal ligation in preventing variceal recurrence.
METHODS: Fifty-one patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices were randomly assigned to be treated by endoscopic scleroligation (n = 25) or endoscopic variceal ligation (n = 26). In the initial session in the endoscopic scleroligation group, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy was performed with injection of 5% ethanolamine oleate around the lower esophagus to obliterate the feeding veins. This was followed by endoscopic variceal ligation from the injection site to the most orad varix. In subsequent sessions, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy was performed with 1% polidocanol. In the endoscopic variceal ligation group, that procedure was performed in all treatment sessions.
RESULTS: Both methods were equally effective in achieving complete eradication of esophageal varices. Among the cases in which complete eradication was achieved, the 1- and 3-year cumulative recurrence rates in the endoscopic scleroligation group (9.5%, 22.1%) were significantly lower than those in the endoscopic variceal ligation group (61.9%, 72.2%) (p < 0.01). The survival rates and incidences of treatment-related complications have been similar among patients treated by both methods.
CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic scleroligation is superior to endoscopic variceal ligation in preventing variceal recurrence.