ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2026
Combined endoscopic ultrasound and conventional endoscopy improves outcomes in bleeding GOV2 and IGV1 gastric varices: A multicenter retrospective propensity-matched cohort study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided cyanoacrylate injection for gastric varices (GVs) may leave residual untreated vessels due to incomplete visualization of distal collateral channels. Whether adding conventional endoscopic injection improves outcomes remains unclear. Objectives: This multicenter retrospective study evaluated a combined EUS-guided and conventional endoscopic approach in patients with bleeding GOV2 or IGV1 varices. Design: This retrospective study (February 2022-December 2024) included 141 cirrhotic patients with acute gastric variceal bleeding from three Chinese tertiary centers. Methods: Patients received either EUS-guided therapy alone or combined therapy with supplementary conventional endoscopic injection per institutional practice. Propensity score matching (1:1) and multivariable Cox regression were used to reduce selection bias. Primary outcome was variceal rebleeding; secondary outcomes included technical success, variceal recurrence, reintervention, mortality, and adverse events. Results: Technical success was achieved in all patients (100%). After matching, variceal recurrence rates were comparable between groups (5.36% vs. 12.50%, P = 0.185), whereas rebleeding occurred less frequently in the combination group than in the EUS group (7.14% vs. 25.00%, P = 0.010). This association appeared more pronounced in IGV1 varices (2.70% vs. 27.03%, P = 0.016), although the subgroup finding should be interpreted cautiously because the interaction test was not statistically significant. Reintervention was also less frequent in the combination group (12.50% vs. 35.71%, P = 0.004). Mortality and adverse event rates were comparable between groups. Conclusion: Supplementary conventional endoscopic injection after EUS-guided therapy was associated with lower risks of rebleeding and reintervention without an apparent increase in adverse events. This combineds strategy may be a feasible option to improve treatment durability in selected patients with high-risk GOV2 or IGV1 gastric varices, but prospective randomized studies are needed for confirmation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.