Endoscopic band ligation of oesophageal varices
Background: For 25 years the optimal management of bleeding oesophageal varices has included endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) both to arrest bleeding and to prevent rebleeding. However, the recent innovation of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) may be a more effective treatment; this paper...
Saved in:
Published in: | British journal of surgery Vol. 86; no. 4; pp. 437 - 446 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Oxford, UK
Blackwell Science Ltd
01-04-1999
Wiley |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Background:
For 25 years the optimal management of bleeding oesophageal varices has included endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) both to arrest bleeding and to prevent rebleeding. However, the recent innovation of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) may be a more effective treatment; this paper reviews its efficacy.
Methods:
All Medline (National Library of Medicine, Washington DC, USA) articles containing the text words ‘oesophageal varices’, ‘sclerotherapy’ or ‘band ligation’ were reviewed. Prospective randomized studies comparing sclerotherapy with band ligation, or combinations thereof, were included.
Results:
After an acute variceal bleed EVL is as effective as EIS for control and eradication of oesophageal varices. Initial control of bleeding is similar, but eradication is achieved in fewer sessions with EVL. EVL is associated with lower rebleeding rates and fewer procedure‐related complications; it is also more effective for control of active bleeding at initial endoscopy. Combination therapy (EIS plus EVL) confers no advantage over EVL alone.
Conclusion:
EVL is similar to EIS for control of bleeding varices, but the former has less associated morbidity, lower rebleeding rates and achieves more rapid variceal eradication. EVL should be considered the endoscopic treatment of choice in the management of variceal haemorrhage. © 1999 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd |
---|---|
Bibliography: | istex:8ED769F42A7AC069DE517AAB9374154696932465 ArticleID:BJS314 ark:/67375/WNG-KHF3KF5L-4 ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-3 content type line 23 ObjectType-Review-1 |
ISSN: | 0007-1323 1365-2168 |
DOI: | 10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01109.x |