Endoscopic Glue Injection vs Glue Plus BRTO or TIPSS for Preventing Gastric Variceal Bleeding: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Umang Arora, Manas Vaishnav, Sagnik Biswas, Anshuman Elhence, Saurabh Kedia, Deepak Gunjan, Soumya Jagannath Mahapatra, Shekhar Swaroop, Ashwani Kumar Mishra, Shivanand Gamanagatti, Arnav Aggarwal

Journal: Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association 2025;23(6):954-964.e10

PMID: 38969074

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The study sought to compare the efficacy of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with cyanoacrylate glue (EIS-CYA) vs EIS-CYA plus a radiologic intervention (RI) (either transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration) for secondary prophylaxis in patients with liver cirrhosis who presented with acute variceal bleeding from cardiofundal varices. Primary outcome measure was gastric varix (GV) rebleed rates at 1 year.

METHODS

Consecutive cirrhosis patients with acute variceal bleeding from cardiofundal varices were randomized into 2 arms (45 in each) after primary hemostasis by EIS-CYA. In the endoscopic intervention (EI) arm, EIS-CYA was repeated at regular intervals (1, 3, 6, and 12 months), while in the RI arm, patients underwent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration followed by endoscopic surveillance.

RESULTS

GV rebleed rates at 1 year were higher in the EI arm compared with the RI arm: 11 (24.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.9%-39.5%) vs 1 (2.2%; 95% CI, 0.1%-11.8%) (P = .004; absolute risk difference: 22.2%; 95% CI, 8.4%-36.6%). GV rebleed-related mortality in the EI arm (8 [17.8%; 95% CI, 8.0%-32.1%]) was significantly higher than in the RI arm (1 [2.2%; 0.1%-11.8%]) (P = .030; absolute risk difference: 15.6; 95% CI, 2.9%-29.2%); however, there was no difference in all-cause mortality between the 2 groups (12 [26.7%; 95% CI, 14.6%-41.9%] vs 7 [15.6%; 95% CI, 6.5%-29.5%]). The number needed to treat to prevent 1 GV-related rebleed at 1 year was 4.5.

CONCLUSIONS

RI for secondary prophylaxis reduces rebleeding from GV and GV rebleeding-related mortality in patients with GV hemorrhage. (CTRI/2021/02/031396).

Copyright © 2025 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Address: Department of Gastroenterology and Human Nutrition Unit, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.; Department of Radiodiagnosis and Interventional Radiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.; National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi, India.; Department of Gastroenterology and Human Nutrition Unit, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India. Electronic address: [email protected].
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.