Improving primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding by adapting therapy to the clinical stage of cirrhosis. A competing‐risk meta‐analysis of individual participant data

Author:

Villanueva Càndid12ORCID,Sapena Victor34,Lo Gin‐Ho5ORCID,Seo Yeon Seok6,Shah Hasnain Ali7,Singh Virendra8ORCID,Tripathi Dhiraj91011ORCID,Schepke Michael12,Gheorghe Cristian13,Bonilha Daniell Q.14,Jutabha Rome1516,Wang Huay‐Min17,Rodrigues Susana G.18,Brujats Anna1,Lee Han Ah.6ORCID,Azam Zahid19,Kumar Pramod8ORCID,Hayes Peter C.11,Sauerbruch Tilman20,Chen Wen‐Chi5ORCID,Iacob Speranta13ORCID,Libera Ermelindo D.14,Jensen Dennis M.212223ORCID,Alvarado Edilmar12ORCID,Torres Ferran34,Bosch Jaume218,

Affiliation:

1. Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Barcelona Spain

2. Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Enfermedades Hepáticas y Digestivas (CIBERehd) Barcelona Spain

3. Biostatistics Unit Medical School, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona Barcelona Spain

4. Medical Statistics Core Facility IDIBAPS, Hospital Clinic Barcelona Spain

5. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine E‐Da Hospital, I‐Shou University Kaohsiung Taiwan

6. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Korea University College of Medicine Seoul Korea

7. Section of Gastroenterology Aga Khan University Karachi Pakistan

8. Department of Hepatology Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research Chandigarh India

9. University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust Birmingham UK

10. Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy University of Birmingham Birmingham UK

11. Department of Hepatology Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh Edinburgh UK

12. Helios Clinic Siegburg Department Gastroenterology and Hepatology Siegburg Germany

13. Center of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Fundeni Clinical Institute "Carol Davila" University of Medicine Bucharest Romania

14. Department of Gastroenterology Federal University of São Paulo, State University of Campinas Campinas Brazil

15. University of Southern California (USC) School of Medicine Los Angeles USA

16. Keck School of Medicine of University of Southern California and Clinical Outreach and Development Los Angeles USA

17. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital Kaohsiung Taiwan, Republic of China

18. University Clinic for Visceral Surgery and Medicine, Inselspital Bern University Hospital Bern Switzerland

19. National Institute of Liver & GI Diseases, Dow University of Health Sciences Karachi Pakistan

20. Department of Internal Medicine I University of Bonn Bonn Germany

21. Department of Medicine, Division of Digestive Diseases David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA Los Angeles California USA

22. Center for the Health Sciences, Los Angeles Veterans Administration Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System Los Angeles California USA

23. Center for Ulcer Research and Education: Digestive Diseases Research Center

Abstract

ABSTRACTBackground & AimsNon‐selective β‐blockers (NSBBs) and endoscopic variceal‐ligation (EVL) have similar efficacy preventing first variceal bleeding. Compensated and decompensated cirrhosis are markedly different stages, which may impact treatment outcomes. We aimed to assess the efficacy of NSBBs vs EVL on survival in patients with high‐risk varices without previous bleeding, stratifying risk according to compensated/decompensated stage of cirrhosis.MethodsBy systematic review, we identified RCTs comparing NSBBs vs EVL, in monotherapy or combined, for primary bleeding prevention. We performed a competing‐risk, time‐to‐event meta‐analysis, using individual patient data (IPD) obtained from principal investigators of RCTs. Analyses were stratified according to previous decompensation of cirrhosis.ResultsOf 25 RCTs eligible, 14 failed to provide IPD and 11 were included, comprising 1400 patients (656 compensated, 744 decompensated), treated with NSBBs (N = 625), EVL (N = 546) or NSBB+EVL (N = 229). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Overall, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs (subdistribution hazard‐ratio (sHR) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.75–1.49) and with EVL + NSBBs vs either monotherapy, with low heterogeneity (I2 = 28.7%). In compensated patients, mortality risk was higher with EVL vs NSBBs (sHR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.11–2.77) and not significantly lower with NSBBs+EVL vs NSBBs, without heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). In decompensated patients, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs and with NSBBs+EVL vs. either monotherapy.ConclusionsIn patients with compensated cirrhosis and high‐risk varices on primary prophylaxis, NSBBs significantly improved survival vs EVL, with no additional benefit noted adding EVL to NSBBs. In decompensated patients, survival was similar with both therapies. The study suggests that NSBBs are preferable when advising preventive therapy in compensated patients.

Funder

Instituto de Salud Carlos III

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Pharmacology (medical),Gastroenterology,Hepatology

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Optimizing the liver transplant candidate;npj Gut and Liver;2024-07-01

2. Non-Selective Beta-Blockers in Patients with Cirrhosis: Current Evidence and Controversy;Liver Cirrhosis and Its Complications - Advances in Diagnosis and Management;2024-06-17

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3