首 页   本刊简介  编委会  审稿专家  在线期刊  写作规范  广告合作  联系我们
您现在的位置:首页 => 在线期刊 => 2020年 8期“胰腺疾病的内镜诊疗” => 肝纤维化及肝硬化 =>肝硬化门静脉高压食管..
肝硬化门静脉高压食管胃静脉曲张出血二级预防后再出血的临床特征
Clinical features of rebleeding after secondary prevention for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in cirrhotic portal hypertension
文章发布日期:2020年08月24日  来源:  作者:路筝,韩晶晶,于晓莉,等  点击次数:581次  下载次数:59次

调整字体大小:

(此处下载失败可以在在线预览处保存副本或者右键另存为)

【摘要】:目的 分析食管胃静脉曲张出血不同二级预防措施后再出血的临床表现、急诊内镜诊治情况及预后。方法 回顾性分析2018年1月至2019年4月解放军总医院第五医学中心食管胃静脉曲张出血二级预防后(内镜、外科、介入预防)再出血行急诊内镜诊治的254例患者临床资料,对照同期单纯药物二级预防再出血的419例患者,观察临床特点,对比分析异同。正态分布的计量资料多组间比较采用方差分析;非正态分布的计量资料多组间比较采用Kruskal-Wallis H检验;进一步两两比较采用Bonferroni法。计数资料组间比较采用χ2检验。结果 254例二级预防后再出血的患者中,有144例(56.69%)曾行内镜预防,40例(15.75%)行手术预防,33例(12.99%)行介入预防,37例(14.57%)联合预防以内镜联合其他预防措施为主。分析出血距最近一次预防时间,手术预防组有57.50%再出血患者距预防时间在5年以上,介入预防组有69.70%发生在经颈静脉肝内门体分流术后的1年内。内镜和联合预防组的患者再出血,分别有40.28%和35.14%发生在预防结束的1年内。再出血时,介入预防组和联合预防组的肝性脑病发生率显著高于其他组(P值均<0.001),介入预防组的腹水情况较其他组控制显著(P值均<0.05)。各组再出血时多项临床指标均存在显著性差异(P值均<0.001),两两比较提示,内镜预防组的血红蛋白和白蛋白显著高于手术组(P值分别为<0.001、0.001)和药物预防组(P值分别为0.001、<0.001)。手术组的血小板水平显著高于介入组(P=0.037)、联合预防组(P<0.001)和药物预防组(P=0.012)。药物预防组的总胆红素水平显著高于内镜组(P=0.037)、介入组(P=0.025)和联合预防组(P<0.001);手术预防组的肌酐水平显著低于其他组(P值均<0.05);联合预防组的凝血功能(凝血酶原时间、国际标准化比值)显著优于药物组(P值均=0.002)。药物预防组的活动性出血比例(68.02%)显著高于内镜组(P<0.001)、介入组(P=0.004)和联合预防组(P=0.008)。手术预防组和药物预防组的食管胃静脉曲张破裂出血比例显著高于其他组(P值均<0.05)。介入预防组的消化性溃疡出血比例显著高于其他组(P值均<0.05)。药物预防组的内镜治疗不满意率和失败率显著高于内镜组(P<0.001)、介入组(P=0.007)和联合预防组(P<0.001)。药物预防组的42 d内再出血率和病死率均显著高于其他组(P值均<0.05)。结论 介入、内镜或联合二级预防,较单纯的药物预防能显著减轻食管胃静脉曲张再出血的程度,提高急诊内镜止血率,显著降低42 d内再出血率和死亡率。需考虑不同二级预防后再出血的临床特点,对食管胃静脉曲张出血二级预防后再出血患者实施个体化治疗。
【Abstract】:Objective To investigate the clinical manifestations, emergency endoscopic diagnosis and treatment, and prognosis of rebleeding after different secondary prevention measures for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in cirrhotic portal hypertension. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed for the clinical data of 254 patients with rebleeding after secondary prevention (endoscopic therapy, surgical treatment, or interventional prevention) for esophagogastric variceal bleeding who underwent emergency endoscopic diagnosis and treatment in The Fifth Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital from January 2018 to April 2019, and 419 patients who received medication alone for the prevention of rebleeding during the same period of time were enrolled as controls. Clinical features were observed and compared between groups. An analysis of variance was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous data between groups, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used for comparison of continuous data with heterogeneity of variance between groups. The least significant difference Bonferroni test was used for further comparison between two groups. The chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups. Results Among the 254 patients with rebleeding after secondary prevention, 144 (56.69%) received endoscopic prevention, 40 (15.75%) received surgical prevention, 33 (12.99%) received interventional prevention, and 37(14.57%) received prevention with endoscopy combined with other prevention measures. As for the time from last prevention to bleeding, 57.50% in the surgical prevention group had a time of more than 5 years, and 69.70% in the interventional prevention group experienced bleeding within 1 year after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt; 40.28% in the endoscopic prevention group and 35.14% in the combined prevention group experienced rebleeding within 1 year after prevention ended. During rebleeding, the interventional prevention group and the combined prevention group had a significantly higher incidence rate of hepatic encephalopathy than the other groups (all P<0.001), and the interventional prevention group had significantly better controlled ascites than the other groups (all P<0.05). There were significant differences in various clinical indices between these groups during rebleeding (all P<0.001), and the endoscopic prevention group had significantly higher levels of hemoglobin and albumin than the surgical prevention group (P<0.001 and P=0.001) and the medication prevention group (P=0.001 and P<0.001). The surgical prevention group had a significantly higher platelet count than the interventional prevention group (P=0.037), the combined prevention group (P<0.001), and the medication prevention group (P=0.012). The medication prevention group had a significantly higher level of bilirubin than the endoscopic prevention group (P=0.037), the interventional prevention group (P=0.025), and the combined prevention group (P<0.001); the surgical prevention group had a significantly higher level of creatinine than the other four groups (all P<0.05); the combined prevention group had significantly better coagulation parameters prothrombin time and international normalized ratio than the medication prevention group (both P=0.002). The medication prevention group had a significantly higher proportion of patients with active bleeding than the endoscopic prevention group (P<0.001), the interventional prevention group (P=0.004), and the combined prevention group (P=0.008). The surgical prevention group and the medication prevention group had a significantly higher proportion of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding than the other groups (all P<0.05), and the interventional prevention group had a significantly higher proportion of patients with peptic ulcer and bleeding than the other four groups (all P<0.05). The medication prevention group had significantly higher dissatisfaction rate and failure rate of endoscopic treatment than the endoscopic prevention group (P<0.001), the interventional prevention group (P=0.007), and the combined prevention group (P<0.001). The medication prevention group had significantly higher rebleeding rate and mortality rate within 42 days than the other four groups (all P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with medication prevention alone, interventional prevention, endoscopic prevention, or combined secondary prevention can significantly alleviate the degree of esophagogastric variceal rebleeding, improve the hemostatic rate of emergency endoscopy, and significantly reduce rebleeding rate and mortality rate within 42 days. The clinical features of rebleeding after different secondary prevention measures should be considered to perform individualized treatment of patients with rebleeding after secondary prevention for esophagogastric variceal bleeding.
【关键字】:肝硬化; 高血压,门静脉; 食管和胃静脉曲张; 二级预防; 内窥镜检查
【Key words】:liver cirrhosis; hypertension,portal; esophageal and gastric varices; secondary prevention; endoscopy
【引证本文】:LU Z, HAN JJ, YU XL, et al. Clinical features of rebleeding after secondary prevention for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in cirrhotic portal hypertension[J]. J Clin Hepatol, 2020, 36(8): 1747-1752. (in Chinese)
路筝, 韩晶晶, 于晓莉, 等. 肝硬化门静脉高压食管胃静脉曲张出血二级预防后再出血的临床特征[J]. 临床肝胆病杂志, 2020, 36(8): 1747-1752.

地址:长春市东民主大街519号《临床肝胆病杂志》编辑部 邮编:130061 电话:0431-88782542/3542
临床肝胆病杂志 版权所有 Copyright © 2009 - 2013 Lcgdbzz.org. All Rights Reserv 吉ICP备10000617号

吉公网安备 22010402000041号