SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: LÔBO,Maíra Ribeiro de Almeida
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: CHAVES,Dalton Marques, DE MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux, RIBEIRO,Igor Braga, IKARI,Eduardo, DE MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032019000100099
Resumo: ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: One of the most feared complications with the use of cyanoacrylate for treatment of gastric varices is the occurrence of potentially life-threatening systemic embolism. Thus, endoscopists are turning towards new techniques, including endoscopic coiling, as a potentially safer and more effective treatment option. However, no studies have been performed comparing the two techniques. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided coil and cyanoacrylate injection versus the conventional technique of injection of cyanoacrylate alone. DESIGN: A pilot randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Patients randomized into group I were treated with coil and cyanoacrylate, and those in group II with cyanoacrylate alone. Flow within the varix was evaluated immediately after the treatment session and one month following initial treatment. If thrombosis was confirmed, additional follow-up was performed 4 and 10 months following initial treatment. All patients underwent a thoracic computerized tomography scan after the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients, 16 in each group, were followed for an average of 9.9 months (range 1-26 months). Immediately after the procedure, 6 (37.5%) group-I patients and 8 (50%) group-II patients presented total flow reduction in the treated vessel (P=0.476). After 30 days, 11 (73.3%) group-I patients and 12 (75%) group-II patients were found to have varix thrombosis. In both groups, the majority of patients required only one single session for varix obliteration (73.3% in group I versus 80% in group II). Asymptomatic pulmonary embolism occurred in 4 (25%) group-I patients and 8 (50%) group-II patients (P=0.144). No significant difference between the groups was observed. CONCLUSION: There is no statistical difference between endoscopic ultrasound guided coils plus cyanoacrylate versus conventional cyanoacrylate technique in relation to the incidence of embolism. However, a greater tendency towards embolism was observed in the group treated using the conventional technique. Both techniques have similar efficacy in the obliteration of varices. Given the small sample size of our pilot data, our results are insufficient to prove the clinical benefit of the combined technique, and do not yet justify its use, especially in light of higher cost. Further studies with larger sample size are warranted.
id IBEPEGE-1_422c8ce13438261abf16942535077ede
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0004-28032019000100099
network_acronym_str IBEPEGE-1
network_name_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALEndosonographyCyanoacrylatesEsophageal and gastric varicesGastrointestinal hemorrhageABSTRACT BACKGROUND: One of the most feared complications with the use of cyanoacrylate for treatment of gastric varices is the occurrence of potentially life-threatening systemic embolism. Thus, endoscopists are turning towards new techniques, including endoscopic coiling, as a potentially safer and more effective treatment option. However, no studies have been performed comparing the two techniques. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided coil and cyanoacrylate injection versus the conventional technique of injection of cyanoacrylate alone. DESIGN: A pilot randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Patients randomized into group I were treated with coil and cyanoacrylate, and those in group II with cyanoacrylate alone. Flow within the varix was evaluated immediately after the treatment session and one month following initial treatment. If thrombosis was confirmed, additional follow-up was performed 4 and 10 months following initial treatment. All patients underwent a thoracic computerized tomography scan after the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients, 16 in each group, were followed for an average of 9.9 months (range 1-26 months). Immediately after the procedure, 6 (37.5%) group-I patients and 8 (50%) group-II patients presented total flow reduction in the treated vessel (P=0.476). After 30 days, 11 (73.3%) group-I patients and 12 (75%) group-II patients were found to have varix thrombosis. In both groups, the majority of patients required only one single session for varix obliteration (73.3% in group I versus 80% in group II). Asymptomatic pulmonary embolism occurred in 4 (25%) group-I patients and 8 (50%) group-II patients (P=0.144). No significant difference between the groups was observed. CONCLUSION: There is no statistical difference between endoscopic ultrasound guided coils plus cyanoacrylate versus conventional cyanoacrylate technique in relation to the incidence of embolism. However, a greater tendency towards embolism was observed in the group treated using the conventional technique. Both techniques have similar efficacy in the obliteration of varices. Given the small sample size of our pilot data, our results are insufficient to prove the clinical benefit of the combined technique, and do not yet justify its use, especially in light of higher cost. Further studies with larger sample size are warranted.Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE. 2019-03-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032019000100099Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.56 n.1 2019reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiainstacron:IBEPEGE10.1590/s0004-2803.201900000-08info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLÔBO,Maíra Ribeiro de AlmeidaCHAVES,Dalton MarquesDE MOURA,Diogo Turiani HourneauxRIBEIRO,Igor BragaIKARI,EduardoDE MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneauxeng2019-05-20T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-28032019000100099Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/aghttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br1678-42190004-2803opendoar:2019-05-20T00:00Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
spellingShingle SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
LÔBO,Maíra Ribeiro de Almeida
Endosonography
Cyanoacrylates
Esophageal and gastric varices
Gastrointestinal hemorrhage
title_short SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_full SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_fullStr SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_full_unstemmed SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_sort SAFETY AND EFFICACY OF EUS-GUIDED COIL PLUS CYANOACRYLATE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CYANOACRYLATE TECHNIQUE IN THE TREATMENT OF GASTRIC VARICES: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
author LÔBO,Maíra Ribeiro de Almeida
author_facet LÔBO,Maíra Ribeiro de Almeida
CHAVES,Dalton Marques
DE MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux
RIBEIRO,Igor Braga
IKARI,Eduardo
DE MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux
author_role author
author2 CHAVES,Dalton Marques
DE MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux
RIBEIRO,Igor Braga
IKARI,Eduardo
DE MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv LÔBO,Maíra Ribeiro de Almeida
CHAVES,Dalton Marques
DE MOURA,Diogo Turiani Hourneaux
RIBEIRO,Igor Braga
IKARI,Eduardo
DE MOURA,Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Endosonography
Cyanoacrylates
Esophageal and gastric varices
Gastrointestinal hemorrhage
topic Endosonography
Cyanoacrylates
Esophageal and gastric varices
Gastrointestinal hemorrhage
description ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: One of the most feared complications with the use of cyanoacrylate for treatment of gastric varices is the occurrence of potentially life-threatening systemic embolism. Thus, endoscopists are turning towards new techniques, including endoscopic coiling, as a potentially safer and more effective treatment option. However, no studies have been performed comparing the two techniques. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound guided coil and cyanoacrylate injection versus the conventional technique of injection of cyanoacrylate alone. DESIGN: A pilot randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Patients randomized into group I were treated with coil and cyanoacrylate, and those in group II with cyanoacrylate alone. Flow within the varix was evaluated immediately after the treatment session and one month following initial treatment. If thrombosis was confirmed, additional follow-up was performed 4 and 10 months following initial treatment. All patients underwent a thoracic computerized tomography scan after the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients, 16 in each group, were followed for an average of 9.9 months (range 1-26 months). Immediately after the procedure, 6 (37.5%) group-I patients and 8 (50%) group-II patients presented total flow reduction in the treated vessel (P=0.476). After 30 days, 11 (73.3%) group-I patients and 12 (75%) group-II patients were found to have varix thrombosis. In both groups, the majority of patients required only one single session for varix obliteration (73.3% in group I versus 80% in group II). Asymptomatic pulmonary embolism occurred in 4 (25%) group-I patients and 8 (50%) group-II patients (P=0.144). No significant difference between the groups was observed. CONCLUSION: There is no statistical difference between endoscopic ultrasound guided coils plus cyanoacrylate versus conventional cyanoacrylate technique in relation to the incidence of embolism. However, a greater tendency towards embolism was observed in the group treated using the conventional technique. Both techniques have similar efficacy in the obliteration of varices. Given the small sample size of our pilot data, our results are insufficient to prove the clinical benefit of the combined technique, and do not yet justify its use, especially in light of higher cost. Further studies with larger sample size are warranted.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-03-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032019000100099
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-28032019000100099
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/s0004-2803.201900000-08
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia e Outras Especialidades - IBEPEGE.
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Arquivos de Gastroenterologia v.56 n.1 2019
reponame:Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron:IBEPEGE
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
instacron_str IBEPEGE
institution IBEPEGE
reponame_str Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
collection Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Arquivos de gastroenterologia (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos e Pesquisas de Gastroenterologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||secretariaarqgastr@hospitaligesp.com.br
_version_ 1754193349416321024