Meta-Analysis:
Combination therapy versus pharmacotherapy, endoscopic variceal ligation, or the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt alone in the secondary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
PDF | HTML | Supplementary Files | How to cite
Metrics: PDF 2210 views | HTML 2750 views | ?
Abstract
Lu-Lu Lin1,*, Shi-Ming Du2,*, Yan Fu3, Hui-Yun Gu4, Lei Wang5, Zhi-Yuan Jian6, Xian-Feng Shen6, Jie Luo1,5 and Chao Zhang1
1Center for Evidence-Based Medicine and Clinical Research, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China
2Department of Pharmacy, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China
3Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China
4Department of Gastroenterology, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China
5Administrative Offices, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China
6Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery Treatment Center, Taihe Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan 442000, China
*These authors have contributed equally to this work
Correspondence to:
Jie Luo, email: [email protected]
Chao Zhang, email: [email protected]
Keywords: esophageal varices, liver cirrhosis, endoscopic variceal ligation, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt
Received: March 31, 2017 Accepted: April 25, 2017 Published: May 24, 2017
ABSTRACT
Patients with liver cirrhosis and variceal hemorrhage are at increased risk of rebleeding. We performed a meta-analysis toassess the clinical efficacy of combination therapy (pharmacotherapy and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL)) compared with pharmacotherapy, EVL, or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) alone in the prevention of rebleeding and mortality. A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, up until November 2016, identified relevant randomized controlled trials. Data analysis was performed using Stata 12.0. Regarding overall mortality, combination therapy was as effective as EVL, pharmacotherapy, and TIPS (relative risk (RR) = 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.36-1.08, RR=1.05, 95% CI: 0.68-1.63, and RR=1.39, 95% CI: 0.92-2.09, respectively). Combination therapy was as effective as EVL and pharmacotherapy alone in reducing blood-related mortality (RR=0.43, 95% CI: 0.15-1.25, and RR=0.42, 95% CI: 0.17-1.06), whereas TIPS was more effective than combination therapy (RR=5.66, 95% CI: 1.02-31.40). This was also the case for rebleeding; combination therapy was more effective than EVL and pharmacotherapy alone (RR=0.57, 95% CI: 0.41-0.79, and RR=0.65, 95% CI: 0.48-0.88), whereas TIPS was more effective than combination therapy (RR=9.42, 95% CI: 2.99-29.65). Finally, regarding rebleeding from esophageal varices, combination therapy was as effective as EVL alone (RR=0.59, 95% CI: 0.33-1.06) and was more effective than pharmacotherapy alone (RR=0.58, 95% CI: 0.40-0.85), although was less effective than TIPS (RR=2.20, 95% CI: 1.22-3.99). TIPS was recommended as the first choice of therapy in the secondary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding.
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
PII: 18143