Skip to content

HVPG-guided Laparoscopic Versus Endoscopic Therapy for Variceal Rebleeding in Portal Hypertension: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (CHESS1803)

HVPG-guided Laparoscopic Versus Endoscopic Therapy for Variceal Rebleeding in Portal Hypertension: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (CHESS1803)

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03783065
Enrollment
40
Registered
2018-12-20
Start date
2019-01-02
Completion date
2022-10-28
Last updated
2021-08-17

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Portal Hypertension, Variceal Rebleeding

Keywords

Variceal Rebleeding, Hepatic venous pressure gradient, Laparoscopic Therapy, Endoscopic Therapy

Brief summary

The development of portal hypertension is a vital event in the natural progression of cirrhosis and is associated with severe complications including gastroesophageal varices bleeding. Cirrhotic patients with hemorrhagic shock and/or liver failure caused by variceal bleeding face a mortality of 5-20%. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is the recommended golden standard for portal pressure assessment globally with favorable consistency and repeatability. Reducing the HVPG to levels of 12mmHg or below is associated with protection of variceal hemorrhage. An HVPG\> 16mmHg indicates a higher risk of death and HVPG ≥ 20mmHg predicts failure to control bleeding, early rebleeding, and death during acute variceal hemorrhage. The management of portal hypertension has showed a trend of diversification with the development of medication, endoscopy, radiological intervention and liver transplantation. Although medication and endoscopic therapy have achieved preferable effects and are recommended as standard of care for the prevention of variceal rebleeding, patients with HVPG≥ 16mmHg still have a high risk of treatment failure and a high rate of rebleeding. Recent years, early TIPS is recommended as the first-line therapy for the prevention of rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with HVPG≥ 20mmHg. However, for those with HVPG values between 16 to 20mmHg, there is still lack of strong evidence to demonstrate the best practice for the management. With the rapid advancement of laparoscopic device and technique, the utility of laparoscopic splenectomy and pericardial devascularization showed less surgical trauma, bleeding and complications while retaining dependable effects compared to traditional open surgery, especially for portal hypertension with hypersplenism. In the study, the investigators aim to conduct a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the safety and effectiveness of HVPG-guided (16 to 20mmHg) laparoscopic versus endoscopic therapy for variceal rebleeding in patients with portal hypertension.

Detailed description

The development of portal hypertension is a vital event in the natural progression of cirrhosis and is associated with severe complications including gastroesophageal varices bleeding. Cirrhotic patients with hemorrhagic shock and/or liver failure caused by variceal bleeding face a mortality of 5-20%. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is the recommended golden standard for portal pressure assessment globally with favorable consistency and repeatability. Reducing the HVPG to levels of 12mmHg or below is associated with protection of variceal hemorrhage. An HVPG\> 16mmHg indicates a higher risk of death and HVPG ≥ 20mmHg predicts failure to control bleeding, early rebleeding, and death during acute variceal hemorrhage. The management of portal hypertension has showed a trend of diversification with the development of medication, endoscopy, radiological intervention and liver transplantation. Although medication and endoscopic therapy have achieved preferable effects and are recommended as standard of care for the prevention of variceal rebleeding, patients with HVPG≥ 16mmHg still have a high risk of treatment failure and a high rate of rebleeding. Recent years, early TIPS is recommended as the first-line therapy for the prevention of rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with HVPG≥ 20mmHg. However, for those with HVPG values between 16 to 20mmHg, there is still lack of strong evidence to demonstrate the best practice for the management. With the rapid advancement of laparoscopic device and technique, the utility of laparoscopic splenectomy and pericardial devascularization showed less surgical trauma, bleeding and complications while retaining dependable effects compared to traditional open surgery, especially for portal hypertension with hypersplenism. In the study, the investigators aim to conduct a multicenter (Shunde Hospital of Southern Medical University, Xingtai People's Hospital, The Fifth Medical Center of Chinese PLA General Hospital, The First Hospital of Lanzhou University) randomized controlled trial to compare the safety and effectiveness of HVPG-guided (16 to 20mmHg) laparoscopic versus endoscopic therapy for variceal rebleeding in patients with portal hypertension.

Interventions

DRUGPropranolol

Propranolol was administrated orally while keeping monitoring heart rate and blood pressure daily.

PROCEDURELaparoscopic splenectomy and pericardial devascularization

Including splenectomy and pericardial devascularizaion under laparoscopy

Either endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) or cyanoacrylate injection was applied according to the condition of varices

Sponsors

Southern Medical University, China
CollaboratorOTHER
Xingtai People's Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
Beijing 302 Hospital
CollaboratorOTHER
LanZhou University
CollaboratorOTHER
Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Clinically and/or pathologically diagnosed cirrhosis with portal hypertension * History of varicial bleeding without receiving endoscopic treatment * HVPG values between 16-20 mmHg * ECOG score ≤ 2 or KPS score ≥ 60 during screening * Voluntarily participated in the study and able to provide written informed consent, understand and willing to comply with the requirements of the study * Child-Pugh class A or B

Exclusion criteria

* Pregnant or breastfeeding women * Prior known or suspected malignancy (hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma etc.) * Limited coagulation situation (Quick\< 50%, PTT\> 50 sec, thrombocyte count \<50000 / μl or disturbed thrombocyte function) * Massive ascites * Child-Pugh class C * Refuse or inadequate for HVPG measurement * Other situations whose existence judged inadequate for participation by the investigators

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Variceal rebleeding1 yearThe occurrence rate of gastroesophageal varices rebleeding within 1-year follow-up

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Hepatocellular carcinoma occurrence1 yearThe occurrence rate of hepatocellular carcinoma 1 year after the therapy
Venous thrombosis1 yearThe occurrence rate of venous thrombosis upon each follow-up
Quality of life score1 yearThe quality of life score measured using the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire upon each follow-up.
Karnofsky score1 yearThe Karnofsky score categorized into low (score 10-40), intermediate (50-70), and high (80-100) upon each follow-up.
Overall survival1 yearThe number of participants still alive 1 year after the therapy

Countries

China

Contacts

Primary ContactXiaolong Qi, MD
qixiaolong@vip.163.com86-18588602600

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 18, 2026