Prognosis of patients with gastric variceal bleeding after endoscopic variceal obturation according to the type of varices

Korean Portal Hypertension Study Group

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was performed to evaluate the treatment efficacy of endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) in patients with gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) according to the type of varices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who were treated with EVO for bleeding from gastric varices (GVs) were included. Patients with a previous history of endoscopic treatment for GVB and those with accompanying portal vein invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma or other malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients with GVB were included. Mean age was 59.4±12.4 years and 72 (79.1%) patients were men. The types of varices were gastroesophageal varices (GOV) type 1 (GOV1), GOV2, and isolated gastric varices type 1 (IGV1) in 30 (33.3%), 35 (38.5%), and 26 (28.6%) patients, respectively. Hemostasis and GV obliteration were achieved in 88 (96.7%) and 81 (89.0%) patients, respectively. Among 81 patients with GV obliteration, GV recurred in 26 (32.1%) patients. The GV recurrence rate was significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2 (P=0.007), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.111) and between patients with GOV2 and IGV1 (P=0.278). Variceal rebleeding occurred in 11 (13.6%) patients. GVB recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients with GOV2 than in those with GOV1 (P=0.034) and IGV1 (P=0.018), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.623). Mortality rate was comparable among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: EVO was very effective in patients with GVB. GV recurrence and GV rebleeding were significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)211-217
Number of pages7
JournalEuropean journal of gastroenterology & hepatology
Volume31
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Feb 1

Fingerprint

Varicose Veins
Stomach
Esophageal and Gastric Varices
Hemorrhage
Recurrence
Portal Vein
Hemostasis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Hepatology
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Prognosis of patients with gastric variceal bleeding after endoscopic variceal obturation according to the type of varices. / Korean Portal Hypertension Study Group.

In: European journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, Vol. 31, No. 2, 01.02.2019, p. 211-217.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{85dca5f60c4848b7998963658cd13e81,
title = "Prognosis of patients with gastric variceal bleeding after endoscopic variceal obturation according to the type of varices",
abstract = "BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was performed to evaluate the treatment efficacy of endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) in patients with gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) according to the type of varices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who were treated with EVO for bleeding from gastric varices (GVs) were included. Patients with a previous history of endoscopic treatment for GVB and those with accompanying portal vein invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma or other malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients with GVB were included. Mean age was 59.4±12.4 years and 72 (79.1{\%}) patients were men. The types of varices were gastroesophageal varices (GOV) type 1 (GOV1), GOV2, and isolated gastric varices type 1 (IGV1) in 30 (33.3{\%}), 35 (38.5{\%}), and 26 (28.6{\%}) patients, respectively. Hemostasis and GV obliteration were achieved in 88 (96.7{\%}) and 81 (89.0{\%}) patients, respectively. Among 81 patients with GV obliteration, GV recurred in 26 (32.1{\%}) patients. The GV recurrence rate was significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2 (P=0.007), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.111) and between patients with GOV2 and IGV1 (P=0.278). Variceal rebleeding occurred in 11 (13.6{\%}) patients. GVB recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients with GOV2 than in those with GOV1 (P=0.034) and IGV1 (P=0.018), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.623). Mortality rate was comparable among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: EVO was very effective in patients with GVB. GV recurrence and GV rebleeding were significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2.",
author = "{Korean Portal Hypertension Study Group} and Lee, {Han A.} and Chang, {Jung M.} and Goh, {Hyun G.} and Kim, {Tae H.} and Young-Sun Lee and Suh, {Sang J.} and Jung, {Young Kul} and Choi, {Hyuk Soon} and Eun-Sun Kim and Kim, {Ji Hoon} and Hyonggin An and Seo, {Yeon Seok} and Yim, {Hyung Joon} and Jeen, {Yoon Tae} and Yeon, {Jong Eun} and Hoon-Jai Chun and Byun, {Kwan Soo} and Soon-Ho Um and Kim, {Chang Duck}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/MEG.0000000000001271",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "211--217",
journal = "European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology",
issn = "0954-691X",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prognosis of patients with gastric variceal bleeding after endoscopic variceal obturation according to the type of varices

AU - Korean Portal Hypertension Study Group

AU - Lee, Han A.

AU - Chang, Jung M.

AU - Goh, Hyun G.

AU - Kim, Tae H.

AU - Lee, Young-Sun

AU - Suh, Sang J.

AU - Jung, Young Kul

AU - Choi, Hyuk Soon

AU - Kim, Eun-Sun

AU - Kim, Ji Hoon

AU - An, Hyonggin

AU - Seo, Yeon Seok

AU - Yim, Hyung Joon

AU - Jeen, Yoon Tae

AU - Yeon, Jong Eun

AU - Chun, Hoon-Jai

AU - Byun, Kwan Soo

AU - Um, Soon-Ho

AU - Kim, Chang Duck

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was performed to evaluate the treatment efficacy of endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) in patients with gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) according to the type of varices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who were treated with EVO for bleeding from gastric varices (GVs) were included. Patients with a previous history of endoscopic treatment for GVB and those with accompanying portal vein invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma or other malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients with GVB were included. Mean age was 59.4±12.4 years and 72 (79.1%) patients were men. The types of varices were gastroesophageal varices (GOV) type 1 (GOV1), GOV2, and isolated gastric varices type 1 (IGV1) in 30 (33.3%), 35 (38.5%), and 26 (28.6%) patients, respectively. Hemostasis and GV obliteration were achieved in 88 (96.7%) and 81 (89.0%) patients, respectively. Among 81 patients with GV obliteration, GV recurred in 26 (32.1%) patients. The GV recurrence rate was significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2 (P=0.007), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.111) and between patients with GOV2 and IGV1 (P=0.278). Variceal rebleeding occurred in 11 (13.6%) patients. GVB recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients with GOV2 than in those with GOV1 (P=0.034) and IGV1 (P=0.018), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.623). Mortality rate was comparable among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: EVO was very effective in patients with GVB. GV recurrence and GV rebleeding were significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2.

AB - BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study was performed to evaluate the treatment efficacy of endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) in patients with gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) according to the type of varices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients who were treated with EVO for bleeding from gastric varices (GVs) were included. Patients with a previous history of endoscopic treatment for GVB and those with accompanying portal vein invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma or other malignancy were excluded. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients with GVB were included. Mean age was 59.4±12.4 years and 72 (79.1%) patients were men. The types of varices were gastroesophageal varices (GOV) type 1 (GOV1), GOV2, and isolated gastric varices type 1 (IGV1) in 30 (33.3%), 35 (38.5%), and 26 (28.6%) patients, respectively. Hemostasis and GV obliteration were achieved in 88 (96.7%) and 81 (89.0%) patients, respectively. Among 81 patients with GV obliteration, GV recurred in 26 (32.1%) patients. The GV recurrence rate was significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2 (P=0.007), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.111) and between patients with GOV2 and IGV1 (P=0.278). Variceal rebleeding occurred in 11 (13.6%) patients. GVB recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients with GOV2 than in those with GOV1 (P=0.034) and IGV1 (P=0.018), while it was comparable between patients with GOV1 and IGV1 (P=0.623). Mortality rate was comparable among the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: EVO was very effective in patients with GVB. GV recurrence and GV rebleeding were significantly lower in patients with GOV1 than in those with GOV2.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058890386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85058890386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001271

DO - 10.1097/MEG.0000000000001271

M3 - Article

C2 - 30300160

AN - SCOPUS:85058890386

VL - 31

SP - 211

EP - 217

JO - European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

JF - European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology

SN - 0954-691X

IS - 2

ER -