OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that ascites is a risk factor for variceal bleeding. Recently, it has been demonstrated that total paracentesis decreases variceal pressure. However, no data are available showing the basal variceal pressure in patients with and without ascites. METHODS: We studied 76 cirrhotic patients, 49 with and 27 without ascites. Variceal pressure was measured by direct puncture. Variceal size, variceal pressure gradient, and variceal wall tension were also obtained. RESULTS: No demographic differences were observed between the groups. Child score was higher (9.7+/-1.5 vs 7.8+/-2.1, p < 0.001) and serum albumin lower (2.6+/-0.6 vs 3.0+/-0.7 mg %, p < 0.02) in ascitic than in nonascitic patients, respectively. Variceal pressure and variceal pressure gradient were significantly higher in patients with ascites than in those without ascites (25.0+/-6 vs 20.4+/-4.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 and 18.75+/-4.7 vs 13.70+/-4.1 mm Hg, p < 0.0001, respectively). The variceal wall tension was significantly higher in patients with ascites (71.0+/-25.1 mm Hg/mm) than in those without ascites (55.1+/-22.1 mm Hg/mm, p < 0.03). No relationship was observed between variceal pressure gradient and liver function. Ascites patients included in Child-Pugh grade A+B presented a similar variceal pressure to Child C patients (18.5+/-4.2 vs 19.3+/-5.7 mm Hg, respectively, p = ns). In addition, no relationship was observed between variceal pressure gradient and etiology of cirrhosis. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that patients with ascites have significantly higher variceal pressure and wall tension than patients without ascites. These results suggest that patients with ascites may be at risk for variceal bleeding.
OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that ascites is a risk factor for variceal bleeding. Recently, it has been demonstrated that total paracentesis decreases variceal pressure. However, no data are available showing the basal variceal pressure in patients with and without ascites. METHODS: We studied 76 cirrhotic patients, 49 with and 27 without ascites. Variceal pressure was measured by direct puncture. Variceal size, variceal pressure gradient, and variceal wall tension were also obtained. RESULTS: No demographic differences were observed between the groups. Child score was higher (9.7+/-1.5 vs 7.8+/-2.1, p < 0.001) and serum albumin lower (2.6+/-0.6 vs 3.0+/-0.7 mg %, p < 0.02) in ascitic than in nonascitic patients, respectively. Variceal pressure and variceal pressure gradient were significantly higher in patients with ascites than in those without ascites (25.0+/-6 vs 20.4+/-4.6 mm Hg, p < 0.001 and 18.75+/-4.7 vs 13.70+/-4.1 mm Hg, p < 0.0001, respectively). The variceal wall tension was significantly higher in patients with ascites (71.0+/-25.1 mm Hg/mm) than in those without ascites (55.1+/-22.1 mm Hg/mm, p < 0.03). No relationship was observed between variceal pressure gradient and liver function. Ascitespatients included in Child-Pugh grade A+B presented a similar variceal pressure to Child C patients (18.5+/-4.2 vs 19.3+/-5.7 mm Hg, respectively, p = ns). In addition, no relationship was observed between variceal pressure gradient and etiology of cirrhosis. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that patients with ascites have significantly higher variceal pressure and wall tension than patients without ascites. These results suggest that patients with ascites may be at risk for variceal bleeding.
Authors: Constantine Frangakis; Jae Ho Sohn; Ahmet Bas; Julius Chapiro; Ruediger E Schernthaner; MingDe Lin; James P Hamilton; Timothy M Pawlik; Kelvin Hong; Rafael Duran Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-11-05 Impact factor: 6.244