What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare the efficacy of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy and endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with ligation for treating esophageal varices.

May 6, 2026DEN OpenOpen Access

Efficiency and Safety of Endoscopic Injection Sclerotherapy With Ligation for Esophageal Varices: A Retrospective Study.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

To compare the efficacy of endoscopic injection sclerotherapy and endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with ligation for treating esophageal varices.
Retrospective study including 104 cases treated with conventional EIS and 44 cases treated with EISL.
Evaluated procedure duration, intra-injection and para-injection volumes, success rates, recurrence-free survival, and adverse events.
EISL showed significantly shorter procedure duration compared to conventional EIS (13.1 vs 20.7 min).
The para-injection volume was lower in EISL compared to conventional EIS (0.7 vs 1.2 mL).
Higher success rate of intravascular injection in the EISL group, especially for F1/F2 varices.
Lower frequency of adverse events such as fever in the EISL group compared to conventional EIS.

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Retrospective analysis shows enhanced efficacy and fewer adverse events in endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with ligation for esophageal varices.

Maki et al. (2026) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Retrospective analysis shows enhanced efficacy and fewer adverse events in endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with ligation for esophageal varices.