Published online Dec 16, 2021. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v13.i12.628
Peer-review started: June 19, 2021
First decision: July 29, 2021
Revised: August 7, 2021
Accepted: November 22, 2021
Article in press: November 22, 2021
Published online: December 16, 2021
Processing time: 177 Days and 3.6 Hours
Patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices bleed at a yearly rate of 5%-15%, and, when variceal hemorrhage develops, mortality reaches 20%. Patients are deemed at high risk of bleeding when they present with medium or large-sized varices, when they have red signs on varices of any size and when they are classified as Child-Pugh C and have varices of any size. In order to avoid variceal bleeding and death, individuals with cirrhosis at high risk of bleeding must undergo primary prophylaxis, for which currently recommended strategies are the use of traditional non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) (i.e., propranolol or nadolol), carvedilol (a NSBB with additional alpha-adrenergic blocking effect) or endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). The superiority of one of these alternatives over the others is controversial. While EVL might be superior to pharmacological therapy regarding the prevention of the first bleeding episode, either traditional NSBBs or carvedilol seem to play a more prominent role in mortality reduction, probably due to their capacity of preventing other complications of cirrhosis through the decrease in portal hypertension. A sequential strategy, in which patients unresponsive to pharmacological therapy would be submitted to endoscopic treatment, or the combination of pharmacological and endoscopic strategies might be beneficial and deserve further investigation.
Core Tip: Variceal hemorrhage still is an important cause of death among patients with cirrhosis, and primary prophylaxis against variceal bleeding is of the utmost importance. Traditional non-selective beta-blockers, carvedilol or endoscopic variceal ligation are currently recommended for primary prophylaxis, and the superiority of one alternative over the others is controversial. This review will provide a comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the different strategies for primary prophylaxis against variceal bleeding, so that practitioners make an informed decision when choosing among them.