Background/aims: We retrospectively compared the effect of endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) and retrograde transvenous obliteration (RTO) in acute cardiofundal variceal bleeding.
Methods: Patients with acute cardiofundal variceal bleeding treated with EVO or RTO at two hospitals were included.
Results: Ninety patients treated with EVO and 86 treated with RTO were analyzed. The mean model for end-stage liver disease score was significantly higher in EVO group than in RTO group (13.5 vs. 11.7, P = 0.016). The bleeding control rates were high (97.8% vs. 96.5%), and the treatment-related complication rates were low in both EVO and RTO groups (2.2% vs. 3.5%). During the median follow-up of 18.0 months, gastric variceal (GV) and esophageal variceal rebleeding occurred in 34 (19.3%) and 7 (4.0%) patients, respectively. The all-variceal rebleeding rates were comparable between EVO and RTO groups (32.4% vs. 20.8% at 2-year, P = 0.150), while the GV rebleeding rate was significantly higher in EVO group than in RTO group (32.4% vs. 12.8% at 2-year, P = 0.003). On propensity score-matched analysis (71 patients in EVO vs. 71 patients in RTO group), both all-variceal and GV rebleeding rates were significantly higher in EVO group than in RTO group (all P < 0.05). In Cox regression analysis, EVO (vs. RTO) was the only significant predictor of higher GV rebleeding risk (hazard ratio 3.132, P = 0.005). The mortality rates were similar between two groups (P = 0.597).
Conclusions: Both EVO and RTO effectively controlled acute cardiofundal variceal bleeding. RTO was superior to EVO in preventing all-variceal and GV rebleeding after treatment, with similar survival outcomes.
Keywords: Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration; Portal hypertension; Prevention; Rebleeding; Vascular plug-assisted retrograde transvenous obliteration.
© 2022. The Author(s).