NCT01112852

EVL (Endoscopic Variceal Ligation) Plus Vasoconstrictor vs.Ligation Plus PPI( Proton Pump Inhibitor) in the Control of Acute Esophageal Variceal Bleeding

A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Ligation Plus Vasoconstrictor vs.Ligation Plus Proton Pump Inhibitor in the Control of Acute Esophageal Variceal Bleeding

• Status: Completed
• Phase: Phase 4
• Study type: Interventional
• Enrollment: 118 (actual)
• Sponsor: National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan · Other Government
• Sex: All
• Age: 18 Years – 80 Years
• Healthy volunteers: Not accepted

Summary

Previous studies showed that combination of endoscopic therapy with vasoconstrictor is better than either vasoconstrictor or endoscopic therapy alone in achieving the successful hemostatsis of acute variceal bleeding. The rationale of using vasoconstrictor is to enhance the efficacy of hemostasis by endoscopic therapy. Nowadays, endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) has replaced endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) as the endoscopic treatment of choice in the arresting of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage. EVL alone can achieve hemotasis up to 97% even in cases of active variceal hemorrhage. However, early rebleeding due to ligation-induced ulcer may be encountered. It appears that prevention of esophageal ulcers and bleeding by a proton pump inhibitor may be more logical than using a vasoconstrictor after cessation of bleeding by EVL.

Detailed description

Previous studies showed that combination of endoscopic therapy with vasoconstrictor is better than either vasoconstrictor or endoscopic therapy alone in achieving the successful hemostatsis of acute variceal bleeding. The rationale of using vasoconstrictor is to enhance the efficacy of hemostasis by endoscopic therapy. Nowadays, endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) has replaced endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) as the endoscopic treatment of choice in the arresting of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage. EVL alone can achieve hemotasis up to 97% even in cases of active variceal hemorrhage. However, early rebleeding due to ligation-induced ulcer may be encountered. It appears that prevention of esophageal ulcers and bleeding by a proton pump inhibitor may be more logical than using a vasoconstrictor after cessation of bleeding by EVL. Thus, we designed a controlled trial to compare the initial hemostasis, early rebleeding rate in cirrhotic patients presenting with acute variceal bleeding receiving either emergency EVL plus somatostatin infusion or losec infusion for 5 days. AIMS: To investigate whether the combination of EVL and somatostatin is superior to the combination of EVL and losec in terms of efficacy in the arresting of acute esophageal variceal bleeding and very early rebleeding.

Conditions

• Esophageal Varices
• Bleeding

Interventions

Type	Name	Description
DRUG	pantoloc 40 mg	pantoloc iv. infusion per day
DRUG	somatostatin or terlipressin	Somatostatin 6mg in 500 cc 5% dextrose, 250μg slow bolus IV infusion followed by 250μg per hour (6mg/ 24 hours) or Terlipressin 2mg bolus was instituted on enrollment followed by 1mg per 6 hours for 5 days. The use of either somatostatin or glypressin was at the discretion of doctors in charge.

Timeline

• Start date: 2006-12-01
• Primary completion: 2010-04-01
• Completion: 2010-04-01
• First posted: 2010-04-28
• Last updated: 2010-04-28