Skip to main content
. 2020 Feb 27;8(5):355–361. doi: 10.1093/gastro/goaa004

Table 4.

Association between esophageal collateral veins and esophageal variceal recurrence in case–control studies: results of meta-analyses

Group No. of studies No. of patients Pooled-effect quantities using random-effects model
Heterogeneity
Odds ratio (95% CI) P-value I 2 P-value
Paraesophageal veins
 Overall (all from Asia) 4 447 4.26 (0.38–48.35) 0.24 77% 0.005
 Using EUS 3 141 7.50 (0.35–161.19) 0.20 75% 0.020
 Using ECDUS 1 306 0.90 (0.11–7.23) 0.92
 EIS 4 403 3.97 (0.37–43.25) 0.26 72% 0.010
 EVL 1 44 18.75 (1.91–184.20) 0.01
Periesophageal veins
 Overall (from Asia) 1 44 1.37 (0.34–5.51) 0.66
 Using EUS 1 44 1.37 (0.34–5.51) 0.66
 EIS 1 44 1.37 (0.34–5.51) 0.66
Perforating veins
 Overall 8 696 9.79 (1.95–49.22) 0.006 80% <0.001
 Using EUS 6 335 11.27 (3.24–39.28) <0.001 54% 0.060
 Using ECDUS 2 361 5.12 (0.00–11,618.16) 0.68 95% <0.001
 EIS 4 418 5.83 (0.37–92.96) 0.21 88% <0.001
 EVL 2 70 8.21 (2.33–28.93) 0.001 0% 0.630
 Asia 7 656 11.10 (1.54–79.82) 0.02 83% <0.001
 Europe 1 40 6.67 (1.46–30.43) 0.01

CI, confidence interval; EUS, endoscopic ultrasound; ECDUS, endoscopic color Doppler ultrasonography; EIS, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy; EVL, endoscopic variceal ligation.