|
Jin-Wei
Cheng, Liang Zhu, Zhe-Ming Song, Department of Gastroenterology,
Changzheng Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai
200003, China
Ming-Jun Gu, Department of Endocrinology, Changzheng
Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200003, China
Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China, No. 19872074
Correspondence to: Dr. Liang Zhu, Department of General
Medicine, Changzheng Hospital, Second Military Medical University,
Shanghai 200003, China. jinnwave@sohu.com
Telephone: +86-21-63610109 Ext 73181
Fax: +86-21-63520020
Received: 2002-12-24
Accepted: 2003-02-24
Abstract
AIM: To assess the effects of propranolol as compared with
placebo on gastrointestinal hemorrhage and total mortality in
cirrhotic patients by using meta analysis of 20 published randomized
clinical trials.
METHODS:
A meta analysis of published randomized clinical trials was
designed. Published articles were selected for study based on a
computerized MEDLINE and a manual search of the bibliographies of
relevant articles. Data from 20 relevant studies fulfilling the
inclusion criteria were retrieved by means of computerized and
manual search. The reported data were extracted on the basis of the
intention-to-treat principle, and treatment effects were measured as
risk differences between propranolol and placebo. Pooled estimates
were computed according to a random-effects model. We evaluated the
pooled efficacy of propranolol on the risk of gastrointestinal
hemorrhage and the total mortality.
RESULTS:
A total of 1 859 patients were included in 20 trials, 931 in the
propranolol groups and 928 as controls. Among the 652 patients with
upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage, 261 patients were treated
with propranolol, and 396 patients were treated with placebo or
non-treated. Pooled risk differences of gastrointestinal hemorrhage
were -18 % [95 % CI, -25 %, -10 %] in all trials, -11 % [95 % CI,
-21 %, -1 %] in primary prevention trials, and -25 % [95 % CI, -39
%, -10 %] in secondary prevention trials. A total of 440 patients
died, 188 in propranolol groups and 252 in control groups. Pooled
risk differences of total death were -7 % [95 % CI, -12 %, -3 %] in
all trials, -9 % [95 % CI, -18 %, -1 %] in primary prevention
trials, and -5 % [95 % CI, -9 %, -1 %] in secondary prevention
trials.
CONCLUSION:
Propranolol can markedly reduce the risks of both primary and
recurrent gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and also the total mortality.
Cheng
JW, Zhu L, Gu MJ, Song ZM. Meta analysis of propranolol effects on
gastrointestinal hemorrhage in cirrhotic patients. World J
Gastroenterol 2003;
9(8): 1836-1839
http://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/9/1836.asp
INTRODUCTION
Gastrointestinal hemorrhage due to portal hypertension is a
leading cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. The first episode
of bleeding is fatal in 40 % to 50 % of such patients and two-thirds
die within 1 year. It has been shown that treatment with propranolol
can reduce portal venous pressure[1], portal blood flow[2] and
superior portosystemic collateral blood flow[3] and its efficacy on
preventing gastrointestinal hemorrhage has been assessed in many
randomized clinical trials. Some trials have been primary, in which
the drug was used to prevent hemorrhage in patients who have not
bled, some have been secondary with the drug used to prevent
rebleeding. Numerous primary and secondary prevention studies
concluded that propranolol treatment decreased the incidence of
gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Thus far, however, randomized clinical
trials usually included small sample sizes and showed conflicting
results, which hindered researchers drawing conclusions from the
trials.
In meta analysis each treated group is compared with controls
from the same study, and the treatment effect is combined across all
studies, to provide information both about the presence of any
significant effect and about its size. We have made extensive
efforts to find all relevant studies by means of computerized and
manual search. Then we combined all the studies including primary
and secondary, to assess the effectiveness of propranolol as
compared with placebo on the prevention of gastrointestinal
hemorrhage.
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
This
meta analysis was performed according to a protocol determined
before the study, and the widely accepted methodological
recommendations[4-6]. Measurement of treatment effectiveness was
determined on the basis of primary or recurrent gastrointestinal
hemorrhage, and mortality.
Selection
of trials
Studies
that fulfilled the following criteria were included in the present
meta analysis: (a) propranolol was compared with placebo; (b)
patients were randomly assigned to the treatment regimen, and
studies were prospective; (c) patients with cirrhosis of liver were
included; (d) outcomes of primary or recurrent bleeding, and death
were assessed; (e) results were published as abstracts or full
reports.
Study
identification
Pertinent
studies were retrieved from MEDLINE database by using the search
terms "propranolol", "cirrhosis" and
"gastrointestinal hemorrhage" and by limiting the search
to reports of clinical trials and studies with human patients. In
addition, a manual search was performed by checking the reference
lists from articles or reviews to identify studies not yet included
in MEDLINE database. When the results of a single study were
reported in more than one publication, only the most recent and
complete data were included in the meta-analysis. Finally, twenty
randomized clinical trials that fulfilled the criteria were
identified, fifteen were published in full form[7-21], and five in
abstract form[22-26].
Data
extraction
Data
from each randomized clinical trial were extracted by two
independent reviewers (Jin-Wei Cheng, Liang Zhu). For each study and
each type of treatment, the following data were extracted: number of
patients, and number of each outcome. Numeric discrepancies between
the two independent data extractions were resolved after discussion.
Statistical
methods
All
comparisons were performed according to the randomly assigned
treatment (intended-treatment analysis). Because of different
clinical characteristics among study groups, and varying sample
sizes, we assumed that heterogeneity was present even not
statistically significant, and we decided to combine data by using a
random-effects model to achieve more conservative estimates[27].
For all the outcomes, the pooled estimates were computed with
the method of DerSimonian and Laird[27]. Summary point estimates and
95 % confidence interval (CI) were reported. Risk differences less
than zero denoted an advantage for propranolol. Those more than zero
denoted an advantage for placebo. 95 % CIs of risk differences not
including 0 denoted a statistically significant advantage.
RESULTS
All
trials
A
total of 1 859 patients were included in the twenty trials, 931 in
the propranolol groups and 928 as controls.
Table
1 Point estimates and
95 % CIs of the risk difference of gastrointestinal hemorrhage
|
Prapranolol
group
|
Control group
|
Risk difference
and its 95 % CI (%) |
|
Total
|
Bled
|
Total
|
Bled
|
|
| Primary
prevention
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pascal (1984)
|
34
|
1
|
35
|
9
|
-23 [-38, -7]
|
| Mills (1987)
|
38
|
19
|
43
|
33
|
-27 [-47, -6]
|
| Pascal (1987)
|
118
|
20
|
112
|
30
|
-10 [-20,
1] |
| Italian (1988)
|
85
|
16
|
89
|
27
|
-12 [-24, 1]
|
| Strauss (1988)
|
20
|
4
|
16
|
4
|
-5 [-33, 23]
|
|
Colman (1990)
|
23
|
8
|
25
|
2
|
27 [5, 49]
|
| Andreani
(1990)
|
43
|
2
|
41
|
13 |
-27
[-43,-11] |
| Conn (1991)
|
51
|
4
|
51
|
14
|
-20
[-34, -5]
|
| Prova (1991)
|
68
|
23
|
72
|
19
|
7 [-8, 23]
|
| Subtotal
|
480
|
97
|
484
|
151
|
-11 [-21, -1]
|
| Overall effect
|
|
|
Z=-2.15
|
P=0.03
|
|
| Secondary
prevention
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Burroughs (1983)
|
26
|
14
|
22
|
13
|
-5 [-33, 23]
|
| Lebrec (1984)
|
38
|
6
|
36
|
23
|
-48
[-68,-29]
|
| Cerbelaud
(1986)
|
42
|
17
|
42
|
33
|
-38
[-57,-19]
|
| Villeneuve (1986)
|
42
|
32
|
37
|
30
|
-5 [-23, 13]
|
| Queuniet (1987)
|
51
|
29
|
48
|
31
|
-8 [-27, 11]
|
| Marbet (1988)
|
10
|
2
|
10
|
9
|
-70
[-101,-39]
|
| Colombo (1989)
|
32
|
8
|
30
|
14 |
-22 [-45, 2] |
|
Sheen (1989)
|
18
|
8
|
18
|
15
|
-39
[-68,-10]
|
| Garden (1990)
|
38
|
20
|
43
|
36
|
-31
[-50,-12]
|
| Colman (1990)
|
26
|
9
|
26
|
13
|
-15
[-42, 11]
|
| Perez-Ayuso (1991)
|
26
|
16
|
28
|
24
|
-24
[-47, -1]
|
| Calès (1999)
|
102
|
3
|
104
|
4
|
-1 [-6, 4]
|
| Subtotal
|
451
|
164
|
444
|
245
|
-25 [-39,-10]
|
| Overall effect
|
|
|
Z=-3.34
|
P=0.0008
|
|
| All
trials |
|
|
|
|
|
| Total
|
931
|
261
|
928
|
396
|
-18 [-25, -10]
|
| Overall effect
|
|
|
Z=-4.38
|
P=0.00001
|
|
In the 20 trials, among the 652 patients with upper
gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage, 261 were treated with propranolol,
and 396 were treated with placebo or not treated. The overall
weighted bleeding rate was 31 % for propranolol and 48 % for
controls. The pooled risk difference was -18 % [95 % CI, -25 %, -10
%], and the reduction had statistical significance (Z=-4.38, P<0.001,
Table 1).
A total of 440 patients died, 188 in propranolol groups and
252 in control groups. The overall weighted bleeding rate was 17 %
after propranolol treatment and 24 % after placebo treatment. The
pooled risk difference was -7 % [95 % CI, -12 %, -3 %], and the
reduction due to propranolol also was statistically significant (Z=-3.44,
P<0.001, Table 2).
In ten trials, the overall weighted rate of death due to
bleeding was 6 % in propranolol groups and 12 % in controls. The
pooled risk difference was -5 % [95 % CI, -9 %, -2 %] (Z=-3.12,
P=0.002).
Table
2 Point estimates and
95 % CIs of the risk difference of death
|
Prapranolol
group
|
Control group
|
Risk difference
and its 95 % CI (%)
|
|
Total
|
Death
|
Total
|
Death
|
|
| Primary
prevention
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Pascal (1984)
|
34
|
1
|
35
|
13
|
-34 [-51, -17]
|
| Mills (1987)
|
38
|
15
|
43
|
19
|
-5 [-26, 17]
|
| Pascal (1987)
|
118
|
25
|
112
|
40
|
-15
[-26, -3]
|
| Italian (1988)
|
85
|
30
|
89
|
22
|
11 [-3, 24]
|
| Strauss (1988)
|
20
|
7
|
16
|
7
|
-9 [-41, 23]
|
| Colman (1990)
|
23
|
6
|
25
|
7
|
-2 [-27, 23]
|
| Andreani (1990)
|
43
|
13
|
41
|
18
|
-14
[-34, 7]
|
| Conn (1991)
|
51
|
8
|
51
|
11
|
-6 [-21, 9]
|
| Prova (1991)
|
68
|
7
|
72
|
14
|
-9 [-21, 3]
|
| Subtotal
|
480
|
112
|
484
|
151
|
-9 [-18, -1]
|
| Overall effect
|
|
|
Z=-2.11
|
P=0.03
|
|
| Secondary
prevention
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Burroughs (1983)
|
26
|
4
|
22
|
5
|
-7 [-30, 15]
|
| Lebrec (1984)
|
38
|
3
|
36
|
8
|
-14 [-30,
2]
|
| Cerbelaud (1986)
|
42
|
5
|
42
|
12
|
-17
[-33, 0]
|
| Villeneuve (1986)
|
42
|
19
|
37
|
14
|
7 [-14, 29]
|
|
Queuniet (1987)
|
51
|
12
|
48
|
13
|
-4 [-21, 14]
|
| Marbet (1988)
|
10
|
1
|
10
|
3
|
-20 [-54,
14]
|
| Colombo (1989)
|
32
|
4
|
30
|
7
|
-11 [-30,
8]
|
| Sheen (1989)
|
18
|
0
|
18
|
2
|
-11 [-28,
6]
|
| Garden (1990)
|
38
|
14
|
43
|
19
|
-7 [-29, 14]
|
| Colman (1990)
|
26
|
1
|
26
|
1
|
0 [-10, 10]
|
|
Perez-Ayuso (1991)
|
26
|
4
|
28
|
7
|
-10 [-31,
12]
|
| Calès (1999)
|
102
|
9
|
104
|
10
|
-1 [-9, 7]
|
| Subtotal
|
451
|
76
|
444
|
101
|
-5 [-9, -1]
|
| Overall effect
|
|
|
Z=-2.26
|
P=0.02
|
|
| All
trials
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total
|
931
|
188
|
928
|
252
|
-7 [-12, -3]
|
| Overall
effect
|
|
|
Z=-3.44
|
P=0.0006
|
|
Primary
prevention
There
were 964 patients in the nine primary prevention trials. Of the
total 480 patients treated with propranolol, 97 patients bled from
upper gastrointestinal tract, the overall weighted rate was 20 %.
And 112 patients died, the overall weighted rate was 22 %. In the
control groups (484 patients), the overall weighted rate of bleeding
was 31 % (151 patients), and that of death was 31 % (151 patients).
The pooled risk difference of bleeding was -11 % [95 %CI, -21
%, -1 %], and that of death was -9 % [95 % CI, -18 %, -1 %]. Both of
the reduction due to propranolol had statistical significance (Table
1, Table 2).
Death due to bleeding was reported in 5 primary prevention
trials, the overall weighted rate was 6 % in propranolol groups and
10 % in controls. The pooled risk difference was -4 % [95 % CI, -8
%, 0 %] (Z=-2.06, P=0.04).
Secondary
prevention
Among
the 895 patients in the twelve secondary prevention trials, 451 were
treated with propranolol and 444 were treated with placebo.
The number of patients with bleeding was 164 in propranolol
groups and 245 in control groups, the overall weighted rate was 39 %
and 63 % respectively. The pooled risk difference of hemorrhage was
-25 % [95 % CI, -39 %, -10 %], which had statistical significance (Z=-3.34,
P<0.001, Table 1).
In all secondary prevention trials, the total number of
patients died after propranolol treatment was 76, and 101 in
controls. The overall weighted rate of death was 13 % and 20 %
respectively. The pooled risk difference of death was -5 % [95% CI,
-9 %, -1 %], and the reduction was statistically significant (Z=-2.26,
P=0.02, Table 2).
In 5 recurrent prevention trials, the overall weighted rate
of death due to bleeding was 6 % after propranolol treatment and 15
% in controls. The pooled risk difference was -8 % [95% CI, -15 %,
-2 %] (Z=-2.53, P=0.01).
DISCUSSION
Propranolol
reduces portal pressure, portal blood flow, and superior
portosystemic collateral blood flow, so it can reduce the variceal
pressure to prevent upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage[1-3]. However,
reduction of the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding could not be
replicated in some trials[7, 19, 21]. In the present meta analysis,
we reviewed 20 randomized clinical trials to assess the efficacy of
propranolol on gastrointestinal hemorrhage. The overall results
showed that propranolol significantly reduced the risk of upper
gastrointestinal tract bleeding, with a same effect on survival.
The beneficial effect of propranolol on both first and
recurrent gastrointestinal hemorrhage was observed in all but six of
the trials. The average rate of gastrointestinal hemorrhage was 28 %
in patients treated with propranolol, but 43 % in controls,
suggesting that this interventional therapy is highly effective on
prevention of upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding. The results
also demonstrated the efficacy of propranolol on preventing the
first episode or recurrence of upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding
in patients with cirrhosis. In the six trials, propranolol used to
prevent variceal bleeding was proved to be ineffective, four were
published in full form[7,10,19,21], and two in abstract
form[25, 26].
The results of this meta analysis showed that propranolol
significantly affected survival in all trials, primary prevention
trials, or secondary trials. The average mortality was 20 % in
patients treated with propranolol, but 27 % in controls. The
reduction in total mortality was consistent with a limited effect on
death due to bleeding. Other causes of death, including liver
failure, sepsis, and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma,
were not affected by propranolol.
Although the beta-blockade effect of propranolol can decrease
hepatic blood flow, which may in turn induce deterioration of liver
function in cirrhotic patients, but hepatic decompensation has been
rarely encountered in patients treated with propranolol. In
addition, other adverse effects of propranolol such as hypotension
(3.6 %), heart failure (2.2 %), arrhythmia (1.4 %), bronchial spasm
(2.7 %), dizziness (2.0 %), asthenia (3.4 %) etc were rarely
encountered.
Endoscopic sclerotherapy is a conventional treatment for
reducing the risk of recurrent bleeding, and long-term survival may
also improve[28-33]. Another meta analysis which we conducted showed
that the average recurrent bleeding rate was 42 % after endoscopic
sclerotherapy, but was only 36 % in propranolol groups, and 55 % in
control group in our present meta analysis. A randomized clinical
trial suggested that the efficacy of combined sclerotherapy and
propranolol on the primary prevention of hemorrhage in cirrhotic
patients with varices was the same as propranolol alone[34]. In
other words, endoscopic sclerotherapy did not consistently improve
survival. Sclerotherapy, like propranolol, is associated with a low
incidence of side-effects, but side effects such as esophageal
perforation, may be life-threatening. The technique also is more
time demanding on both physicians and patients.
In conclusion, the results of this meta analysis of the
existing controlled trials show that propranolol is an effective
means of reducing both the incidence of bleeding from upper
gastrointestinal tract and the total mortality, and has the
advantage of being safe and cost-effective. The combined data
indicate that propranolol reduces the risk of bleeding or rebleeding
by about 20 %, in both primary and secondary prevention and it also
reduces mortality. The primary prevention trials, which included
patients with obvious varices at high risk of bleeding, clearly show
a beneficial effect. Based upon the analysis we would recommend a
long-term treatment of gastrointestinal hemorrhage with propranolol.
However, for many patients with portal hypertension without obvious
varices, large prospective multicenter trials are indicated to
determine the preventive benefit of propranolol. Further comparative
trials of propranolol versus sclerotherapy are required to identify
which is superior for secondary prevention of gastrointestinal
hemorrhage.
REFERENCES
1
Luca A, Garcia-Pagan JC, Feu F, Lopez-Talavera JC, Fernandez
M, Bru C, Bosch J, Rodes J. Noninvasive
measurement of femoral blood
flow and portal pressure response to propranolol in patients with
cirrhosis.
Hepatology 1995; 21: 83-88
2
Albillos A, Perez-Paramo M, Cacho G, Iborra J, Calleja JL,
Millan I, Munoz J, Rossi I, Escartin P. Accuracy of portal
and
forearm blood flow measurements in the assessment of the portal
pressure response to propranolol. J Hepatol
1997; 27: 496-504
3
Escorsell A, Bordas JM, Feu F, Garcia-Pagan JC, Gines A,
Bosch J, Rodes J. Endoscopic assessment of variceal volume
and wall
tension in cirrhotic patients: effects of pharmacological therapy.
Gastroenterology 1997; 113: 1640-1646
4
Egger M, Smith GD, Phillips AN. Meta-analysis: principles and
procedures. BMJ 1997; 315: 1533-1537
5
Egger M, Smith GD. Meta-Analysis. Potentials and promise. BMJ
1997; 315: 1371-1374
6
Pogue J, Yusuf S. Overcoming the limitations of current
meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet
1998; 351:
47-52
7
Burroughs AK, Jenkins WJ, Sherlock S, Dunk A, Walt RP,
Osuafor TO, Mackie S, Dick R. Controlled trial of propranolol
for
the prevention of recurrent variceal hemorrhage in patients with
cirrhosis. N Engl J Med 1983; 309: 1539-1542
8
Lebrec D, Poynard T, Bernuau J, Bercoff E, Nouel O, Capron
JP, Poupon R, Bouvry M, Rueff B, Benhamou JP. A
randomized
controlled study of propranolol for prevention of recurrent
gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with
cirrhosis: a final
report. Hepatology 1984; 4: 355-358
9
Villeneuve JP, Pomier-Layrargues G, Infante-Rivard C, Willems
B, Huet PM, Marleau D, Viallet A. Propranolol for
the prevention of
recurrent variceal hemorrhage: a controlled trial. Hepatology 1986;
6: 1239-1243
10
Queuniet AM, Czernichow P, Lerebours E, Ducrotte P, Tranvouez
JL, Colin R. Controlled study of propranolol in
the prevention of
recurrent hemorrhage in cirrhotic patients. Gastroenterol Clin Biol
1987; 11: 41-47
11
Pascal JP, Cales P. Propranolol in the prevention of first
upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage in patients with
cirrhosis
of the liver and esophageal varices. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 856-861
12
The Italian Multicenter Project for Propranolol in Prevention
of Bleeding. Propranolol for prophylaxis of bleeding in
cirrhotic
patients with large varices: a multicenter, randomized clinical
trial. Hepatology 1988; 8: 1-5
13
Marbet UA, Straumann A, Gyr KE, Beglinger C, Schaub N,
Bogtlin J, Loosli J, Kiowski W, Ritz R, Stalder GA. Reduction
in
early recurrence of variceal bleeding by propranolol. Scand J
Gastroenterol 1988; 23: 369-374
14
Colombo M, de Franchis R, Tommasini M, Sangiovanni A,
Dioguardi N. Beta-blockade prevents recurrent
gastrointestinal
bleeding in well-compensated patients with alcoholic cirrhosis: a
multicenter randomized controlled
trial. Hepatology 1989; 9: 433-438
15
Sheen IS, Chen TY, Liaw YF. Randomized controlled study of
propranolol for prevention of recurrent esophageal
varices bleeding
in patients with cirrhosis. Liver 1989; 9: 1-5
16
Garden OJ, Mills PR, Birnie GG, Murray GD, Carter DC.
Propranolol in the prevention of recurrent variceal hemorrhage
in
cirrhotic patients. A controlled trial. Gastroenterology 1990; 98:
185-190
17
Andreani T, Poupon RE, Balkau BJ, Trinchet JC, Grange JD,
Peigney N, Beaugrand M, Poupon R. Preventive therapy of
first
gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis: results of a
controlled trial comparing propranolol,
endoscopic sclerotherapy and
placebo. Hepatology 1990; 12: 1413-1419
18
Conn HO, Grace ND, Bosch J, Groszmann RJ, Rodes J, Wright SC,
Matloff DS, Garcia-Tsao G, Fisher RL, Navasa
M, Drewniak SJ,
Atterbury CE, Bordas JM, Lerner E, Bramante C. Propranolol in the
prevention of the first
hemorrhage from esophagogastric varices: A
multicenter, randomized clinical trial. The Boston-New Haven-
Barcelona Portal Hypertension Study Group. Hepatology 1991;
13: 902-912
19
The PROVA Study Group. Prophylaxis of first hemorrhage from
esophageal varices by sclerotherapy, propranolol or
both in
cirrhotic patients: a randomized multicenter trial. Hepatology 1991;
14: 1016-1024
20
Perez-Ayuso RM, Pique JM, Bosch J, Panes J, Gonzalez A, Perez
R, Rigau J, Quintero E, Valderrama R, Viver J, Esteban
R, Rodrigo L,
Bordas JM, Rodes J. Propranolol in prevention of recurrent bleeding
from severe portal
hypertensive gastropathy in cirrhosis. Lancet
1991; 337: 1431-1434
21
Cales P, Oberti F, Payen JL, Naveau S, Guyader D, Blanc P,
Abergel A, Bichard P, Raymond JM, Canva-Delcambre V,
Vetter D, Valla
D, Beauchant M, Hadengue A, Champigneulle B, Pascal JP, Poynard T,
Lebrec D. Lack of effect
of propranolol in the prevention of large
oesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: a randomized trial.
French-Speaking Club for the Study of Portal Hypertension. Eur J
Gastroenterol Hepatol 1999; 11: 741-745
22 Pascal JP. Prophylactic treatment of variceal bleeding in
cirrhotic patients with propranolol: a multicentric
randomized
study. Hepatology 1984; 4: 1092
23 Cerbelaud P, Lavignolle A, Perrin D, Jutel P, Beaujard E,
Colomb P, Le Bodic L. Propranolol et prevention des recidives
de
rupture de varice oesophagienne du cirrhotique. Gastroenterol Clin
Biologique 1986; 10: 18
24 Mills PR, Garden OJ, Birnie GG, Carter DC. Propranolol in the
prevention of further variceal hemorrhage in
cirrhosis.
Gastroenterology 1987; 92: 1755
25 Strauss E, de Sa MFG, Albano A, Lacet CMC, Leite MO, Maffei
RA. A randomized controlled trial for the prevention of
the first
upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to portal hypertension in
cirrhosis: sclerotherapy or propranolol versus
control groups.
Hepatology 1988; 8: 1395
26 Colman J, Jones P, Finch C, Dudley F. Propranolol in the
prevention of variceal haemorrhage in alcoholic cirrhotic
patients.
Hepatology 1990; 12: 851
27
Der Simonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials.
Control Clin Trials 1986; 7: 177-188
28
de la Pena J, Rivero M, Sanchez E, Fabrega E, Crespo J, Pons-Romero
F. Variceal ligation compared with
endoscopic sclerotherapy for
variceal hemorrhage: prospective randomized trial. Gastrointest
Endosc
1999; 49: 417-423
29
Umehara M, Onda M, Tajiri T, Toba M, Yoshida H, Yamashita K.
Sclerotherapy plus ligation versus ligation for
the treatment of
esophageal varices: a prospective randomized study. Gastrointest
Endosc 1999; 50: 7-12
30
Masci E, Stigliano R, Mariani A, Bertoni G, Baroncini D,
Cennamo V, Micheletti G, Casetti T, Tansini P, Buscarini E,
Ranzato
R, Norberto L. Prospective multicenter randomized trial comparing
banding ligation with sclerotherapy
of esophageal varices.
Hepatogastroenterology 1999; 46: 1769-1773
31
Hou MC, Lin HC, Kuo BI, Lee FY, Chang FY, Lee SD. The
rebleeding course and long-term outcome of esophageal
variceal
hemorrhage after ligation: comparison with sclerotherapy. Scand J
Gastroenterol 1999; 34: 1071-1076
32
Hata Y, Hamada E, Takahashi M, Ota S, Ogura K, Shiina S,
Okamoto M, Okudaira T, Teratani T, Maeda S, Koike Y,
Sato S, Obi S,
Tanaka T, Kawabe T, Shiratori Y, Kawase T, Nomura M, Omata M.
Endoscopic variceal ligation is
a sufficient procedure for the
treatment of oesophageal varices in patients with hepatitis C liver
cirrhosis: comparison
with injection sclerotherapy. J Gastroenterol
Hepatol 1999; 14: 236-240
33
Gotoh Y, Iwakiri R, Sakata Y, Koyama T, Noda T, Matsunaga C,
Ogata SI, Ishibashi S, Sakata H, Tsunada S, Fujimoto
K. Evaluation
of endoscopic variceal ligation in prophylactic therapy for bleeding
of oesophageal varices: a
prospective, controlled trial compared
with endoscopic injection sclerotherapy. J Gastroenterol Hepatol
1999; 14: 241-244
34
Avgerinos A, Armonis A, Manolakopoulos S, Rekoumis G,
Argirakis G, Viazis N, Vlachogiannakos J, Adamopoulos
A, Kanaghinis
T, Raptis SA. Endoscopic sclerotherapy plus propranolol versus
propranolol alone in the primary
prevention of bleeding in high risk
cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices: a prospective
multicenter randomized
trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 652-658
Edited
by Xu JY and Wang XL
| |