Skip to content

HVPG-Guided Therapy vs Carvedilol Plus Endotherapy for the Prevention of Esophageal Variceal Rebleeding in Cirrhotic Patients

Hepatic Vein Pressure Gradient(HVPG)-Guided Therapy vs Carvedilol Plus Endotherapy for the Prevention of Esophageal Variceal Rebleeding in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04254822
Enrollment
220
Registered
2020-02-05
Start date
2020-06-01
Completion date
2023-12-31
Last updated
2020-02-05

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

Conditions

Liver Cirrhoses, Variceal Hemorrhage, Esophageal Varices

Keywords

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, Endoscopic variceal ligation, Non-selective β-blocker therapy, Hepatic venous pressure gradient

Brief summary

Variceal bleeding is a major complication of cirrhosis, associated with a hospital mortality rate of 10%-20%. Surviving patients are at high risk for recurrent hemorrhage. For these reasons, management should be directed at its prevention. Endoscopic variceal band ligation (EBL) in combination with non-selective β-blocker (NSBB) therapy is the recommended first line therapy. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunt (TIPS) is the most effective method to prevent rebleeding, however, it is burdened with increased hepatic encephalopathy and deterioration of liver function in patients with advanced cirrhosis. So TIPS placement forms an alternative if first line therapy fails. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is currently the best available method to evaluate the presence and severity of portal hypertension. Patients who experience a reduction in HVPG of ≥20% or to \<12mmHg in response to drug therapy are defined as 'responders'. The lowest rebleeding rates are observed in patients on secondary prophylaxis who are HVPG responders. A recent meta-analysis has demonstrated that combination therapy is only marginally more effective than drug therapy. This suggests that pharmacological therapy is the cornerstone of combination therapy. Adding EBL may not be the optimal approach to improve the outcome of HVPG nonresponders and HVPG non-responders are a special high-risk population that may benefit from a more aggressive approach, such as an early decision for TIPS. It recently was shown that TIPS placement within 72 hours after acute bleeding not only prevented recurrent bleeding but also improved survival. These raise the question of whether ligation together with NSBB should remain the first choice for elective secondary prophylaxis. Therefore, the purpose of the study is to compare whether HVPG-guided therapy is superior to standard combination therapy for the prevention of variceal bleeding in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

Interventions

The TIPS procedures will be performed by experienced interventional radiologists. polytetrafluroethylene-covered stents were used with initial balloon dilatation to 8 mm, aiming for a decrease in portal-venous pressure gradient to less than 12 mm Hg.

DRUGCarvedilol

Carvedilol will be started at least 5 days after the index bleeding, unless a contraindication was present. Carvedilol will be start with 6.25 mg once a day and after 3 days increase to 6.25 mg twice-daily (the maximal dose was 12.5 mg/day). Systolic arterial blood pressure should not decrease \<90 mmHg.

For endoscopic variceal ligation, the first elective session will be carried out within 7 days of randomisation. Then EBL sessions were scheduled every 10-14 days until variceal eradication (disappearance of varices or being too small to be sucked in the banding device).

Sponsors

Air Force Military Medical University, China
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

* Confirmed diagnosis of liver cirrhosis * History of esophageal variceal bleeding confirmed by endoscopy * Time interval between index bleeding and randomization \> 5 days. * Child-Pugh score \< 12,MELD score\<19

Exclusion criteria

* Clinical manifestation of active bleeding * Gastric variceal bleeding: GOV2,IGV1 or IGV2 * Degree of main portal vein thrombosis \> 50% * Refractory ascites * Contraindications of TIPS * Contraindications of NSBB * Budd-Chiari Syndrome * Malignancy tumor * Uncontrolled infections * History of portal-systemic shunt surgery * HIV * Pregnancy or breastfeeding woman * Poor incompliance

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Cumulative incidence of esophageal variceal rebleeding12 monthsSource of variceal rebleeding will be determined by endoscopy.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Cumulative incidence of variceal rebleeding related death12 months
Cumulative incidence of all cause mortality12 months
Cumulative incidence of patients with further decompensation12 monthsDecompensation was defined as variceal rebleeding, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy
Cumulative incidence of patients with ascites12 months
Cumulative incidence of patients with hepatic encephalopathy12 months

Countries

China

Contacts

Primary ContactJun Tie, M.D.,Ph.D.
tiejun7776@163.com+862984771537
Backup ContactHui Chen, M.D.,Ph.D.
qychenhui@163.com+862984771537

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026