• <tr id="yyy80"></tr>
  • <sup id="yyy80"></sup>
  • <tfoot id="yyy80"><noscript id="yyy80"></noscript></tfoot>
  • 99热精品在线国产_美女午夜性视频免费_国产精品国产高清国产av_av欧美777_自拍偷自拍亚洲精品老妇_亚洲熟女精品中文字幕_www日本黄色视频网_国产精品野战在线观看 ?

    Survival outcomes and predictors of mortality, re-bleeding and complications for acute severe variceal bleeding requiring balloon tamponade

    2022-09-01 02:43:40CharlotteKeungAparnaMorganSuongLeMarcusRobertsonPaulUrquhartMichaelSwan
    World Journal of Hepatology 2022年8期

    Charlotte Y Keung, Aparna Morgan, Suong T Le, Marcus Robertson, Paul Urquhart, Michael P Swan

    Charlotte Y Keung, Aparna Morgan, Suong T Le, Marcus Robertson, Michael P Swan, Department of Gastroenterology, Monash Health, Melbourne 3168, Victoria, Australia

    Charlotte Y Keung, Paul Urquhart, Department of Gastroenterology, Eastern Health, Melbourne 3128, Victoria, Australia

    Charlotte Y Keung, Suong T Le, Marcus Robertson, Department of Medicine, Monash University,Melbourne 3168, Victoria, Australia

    Suong T Le, Monash Digital Therapeutics and Innovation Laboratory, Monash University,Melbourne 3168, Victoria, Australia

    Abstract BACKGROUND Acute severe variceal bleeding (AVB) refractory to medical and endoscopic therapy is infrequent but associated with high mortality. Historical cohort studies from 1970-1980s no longer represent the current population as balloon tamponade is no longer first-line therapy for variceal bleeding; treatments including vasoactive therapies, intravenous antibiotics, endoscopic variceal band ligation are routinely used, and there is improved access to definitive treatments including transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. However, only a few studies from the current era exist to describe the practice of balloon tamponade, its outcomes,and predictors with a requirement for further updated information.AIM To describe current management of AVB requiring balloon tamponade and identify the outcomes and predictors of mortality, re-bleeding and complications.METHODS A retrospective multi-centre cohort study of 80 adult patients across two large tertiary health networks from 2008 to 2019 in Australia who underwent balloon tamponade using a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube (SBT) were included for analysis.Patients were identified using coding for balloon tamponade. The primary outcome of this study was all-cause mortality at 6 wk after the index AVB. Secondary outcomes included re-bleeding during hospitalisation and complications of balloon tamponade. Predictors of these outcomes were determined using univariate and multivariate binomial regression.RESULTS The all-cause mortality rates during admission and at 6-, 26- and 52 wk were 48.8%, 51.2% and 53.8%, respectively. Primary haemostasis was achieved in 91.3% and re-bleeding during hospitalisation occurred in 34.2%. Independent predictors of 6 wk mortality on multivariate analysis included the Model for Endstage Liver disease (MELD) score (OR 1.21, 95%CI 1.06-1.41, P = 0.006),advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (OR 11.51, 95%CI 1.61-82.20, P = 0.015) and re-bleeding (OR 13.06, 95%CI 3.06-55.71, P < 0.001). There were no relevant predictors of re-bleeding but a large proportion in which this occurred did not survive 6 wk (76.0% vs 24%). Although mucosal trauma was the most common documented complication after SBT insertion (89.5%), serious complications from SBT insertion were uncommon (6.3%) and included 1 patient who died from oesophageal perforation.CONCLUSION In refractory AVB, balloon tamponade salvage therapy is associated with high rates of primary haemostasis with low rates of serious complications. Re-bleeding and mortality however, remain high.

    Key Words: Balloon tamponade; Acute variceal bleeding; Sengstaken-Blakemore tube; Mortality;Complications; Haemostasis

    lNTRODUCTlON

    Acute severe variceal bleeding (AVB) refractory to endoscopic variceal band ligation (EVBL) and injection therapy occurs infrequently in 10%-20% of variceal haemorrhage but is associated with significant mortality rates of over 30%[1]. In this situation, the main salvage strategy has traditionally involved balloon tamponade with various devices including the Sengstaken-Blakemore tube (SBT)[2],the Minnesota tube and the Linton-Nachlas tube, which are similar devices that differ in terms of the number of balloons and ports[3]. While covered self-expandable metallic oesophageal stents have more recently become available, with potential advantages of improved safety and efficacy over balloon tamponade[1,4], oesophageal stents are still not routinely available in many treating centres. Both these rescue techniques serve a temporising role while awaiting further definitive options including transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) or liver transplantation[5-7].

    Previous retrospective cohort studies published in the 1970s and 1980s demonstrated that balloon tamponade successfully achieved primary haemostasis in 40-98% of cases, however it was associated with a high risk of both re-bleeding (35%-70%) and procedural complications[8-12]. Importantly, the management of AVB has evolved significantly since this time and thus these studies are not reflective of current practice. For example, balloon tamponade is no longer employed as a first-line management option and endoscopic sclerotherapy has long been superseded by EVBL. In addition, the therapeutic armamentarium for AVB has significantly expanded and now encompasses vasoactive treatment,empiric antibiotics, endoscopic therapies and radiologic procedures such as TIPS and BRTO. Finally,expert opinion-based consensus guidelines for variceal bleeding are also now available[5,6]. Currently there is a paucity of literature examining the clinical outcomes of patients treated with current standards of care, who require balloon tamponade for AVB[13,14]. Subsequently this study aims to: (1) Describe the current clinical practice surrounding management of endoscopically uncontrollable AVB requiring balloon tamponade; (2) Identify the outcomes; and (3) Predictors of mortality, re-bleeding and complications of balloon tamponade.

    MATERlALS AND METHODS

    Study design

    A multi-centre retrospective cohort study was undertaken across Monash Health and Eastern Health,two large metropolitan tertiary health care services in Victoria, Australia. All consecutive adult patients(> 18 years) who underwent balloon tamponade using a SBT for refractory AVB between 1stJanuary 2008 until 31stDecember 2019 were included. Patients were identified by the International Classification of Diseases-10 procedure code for gastro-oesophageal balloon tamponade. Data extracted from medical records included baseline demographic information, liver disease severity indicators, clinical and biochemical data relating to variceal bleeding, practice surrounding insertion and monitoring of balloon tamponade devices and clinical outcomes including re-bleeding, survival up to 52 wk and complications of both variceal bleeding and balloon tamponade. All patients were risk stratified using the AIMS65,Rockall, pre-endoscopy Rockall (pre-Rockall), Child-Pugh and Model for Endstage Liver disease(MELD) scores on admission prior to index gastroscopy.

    Acute variceal bleeding management protocols

    AVB was managed according to published United Kingdom and United States guidelines[5,6]. Patients with suspected variceal bleeding received intravenous (IV) antibiotics (ceftriaxone or piperacillintazobactam) and vasoactive therapy with either an octreotide infusion (50 microgram (mcg) bolus,followed by a 25-50 mcg/hour infusion) or IV terlipressin (0.85-1.7 mg 6 hourly). A restrictive blood transfusion policy is standard at the treating centres and patients typically receive packed red cells if their haemoglobin is < 70 g/L (or < 80 g/L in the presence of ischaemic heart disease) with a target haemoglobin level of 80-90 g/L. Endoscopy was performed in either a dedicated endoscopy suite or operating theatre with sedation administered by an anaesthetist in all cases. Bleeding oesophageal varices were treated with EVBL and bleeding gastric varices were treated with variceal obturation using histoacryl and lipiodol or thrombin. In cases of AVB not amenable to endoscopic therapy, both interventional radiology (including TIPS or BRTO) and upper gastrointestinal surgery services were available.

    Study outcome measures

    The primary outcome measure of this study was all-cause mortality after AVB requiring balloon tamponade which was assessed at 6 wk and followed up at 26 and 52 wk. Secondary outcomes assessed included re-bleeding after insertion of SBT and complications of balloon tamponade during the hospital admission. Primary haemostasis was defined as the clinical cessation of variceal bleeding after balloon tamponade during the index hospitalisation and re-bleeding defined as further bleeding after primary haemostasis was achieved upon removal or balloon deflation of the SBT. Patients without cirrhosis(non-cirrhotic portal hypertension) who required balloon tamponade for AVB were excluded from the predictors of mortality analyses but included in remaining analyses surrounding balloon tamponade practice.

    Ethics approval

    The Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee assessed this study as low risk (RES-21-0000-218Q-70254) and did not require participant informed consent.

    Statistical analysis

    Descriptive statistics was used to analyse continuous variables expressed as median and interquartile range (IQR) for continuous non-parametric variables, and absolute frequencies between groups for categorical variables. Analysis was performed on factors potentially contributing to death, re-bleeding and balloon tamponade complications using Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and Fisher’s Exact Test for dichotamous variables. Univariate binomial regression was used to identify potential clinically relevant variables predictive of death, re-bleeding and complications and those that reached statistical significance (P< 0.10) were then included in a multivariate binomial regression analysis.Missing data was excluded from multivariate analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using licensed SPSS software (IBM Corp. Released 2020. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 27.0. Armonk, NY:IBM Corp). Figures for survival analysis were prepared using licensed GraphPad Prism software(GraphPad Software for Windows, Version 9.0.0, Sand Diego, California).

    RESULTS

    Baseline characteristics

    Overall, there were 81 adult patients who required balloon tamponade with SBT for endoscopically uncontrollable AVB. Insufficient information was available for 1 patient who was subsequently excluded from the analysis (n =80). Cirrhosis was diagnosed in 75 (93.8%) patients but 5 (6.3%) had non-cirrhotic portal hypertension and were not included in the predictors of mortality analyses.

    Most of the patients were male (61, 76.3%) with a median age of 56 years (range 34 to 80 years). Most patients with cirrhosis had advanced cirrhosis with a median Child-Pugh score 9 (IQR 8-11) and median MELD score 17 (IQR 13-21). The most common aetiology of cirrhosis was alcohol-related liver disease(54, 72.0%) of which 34 (63.0%) were actively still consuming alcohol, followed by chronic hepatitis B or C (30, 40.0%) and then non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (7, 9.3%). Eleven (14.7%) patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) had Stage C (Advanced) or Stage D (Terminal) staging as per the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer classification[15].

    The presence of varices had been documented in 51 (63.8%) patients prior to the index bleed. Of these patients, 47.1% of these had prophylactic EVBL prior to the index AVB at a median duration of 3 wk prior (IQR 2-12 wk). Non-selective beta blocker use was documented in 23 (28.8%) patients at the time of variceal haemorrhage.

    The baseline characteristics of the patients are presented in Table 1 which compares characteristics of those who survived and those who died at 6 wk after the index variceal bleed. Compared to patients who survived, patients who died were noted to have significantly higher Child-Pugh and MELD scores(P =0.004 andP< 0.001, respectively), international normalised ratio (P< 0.001), albumin (P =0.034),bilirubin (P =0.003), sodium (P =0.025), creatinine (P =0.014) and lactate levels (P =0.007) at the time of presentation to hospital. In addition, the diagnosis of HCC was significantly more prevalent in patients who died within 6 wk (P =0.019).

    Table 1 Baseline characteristics of patients with cirrhosis requiring balloon tamponade for acute severe variceal bleeding comparing death and survival at 6 wk

    Emergency and endoscopic management of index variceal bleed

    Including all patients who required balloon tamponade (n =80), at presentation of the index variceal bleed, 48.8% (39) of patients were tachycardic with a heart rate over 100 beats/min and 28.7% (23) were hypotensive with a systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg. A reduced Glasgow Coma Scale score was recorded in 24 (30%) patients and 30% (24) required oxygen supplementation at concentrations of at least FiO2 35% for hypoxia. Almost all patients received vasoactive agent therapy with either terlipressin or octreotide (79, 98.8%) and IV antibiotics (77, 96.3%) in the emergency department. Most patients received vitamin K (65, 81.3%) and 16.5% (13 patients) received human prothrombin complex concentrate (Prothrombinex?) in an attempt to correct coagulopathy.

    Table 2 summarises the medical and endoscopic management of the index variceal bleed and the clinical practice surrounding insertion of SBT for salvage therapy. The median time to initial endoscopy after AVB was 6.8 h (IQR 4.2-19.0 h). The source of bleeding was noted to be oesophageal varices in 80.0% (64 patients) with 20.0% (16 patients) due to gastric varices. Initial endoscopic therapy was performed in 45 patients (56.4%). Insertion of balloon tamponade devices were performed by specialist endoscopists in all cases, most commonly during the initial gastroscopy. The indications for balloon tamponade with SBT were incomplete haemostasis (39, 48.8%), poor endoscopic views (26, 32.5%) or both (15, 18.8%). The SBT insertion approach was documented to be oral in 49 (61.3%) and nasal in 22(31.0%), while no documentation was available in 9 (11.3%). Confirmation of SBT position by either direct endoscopic vision or chest X-ray was documented in 80.5% of procedures. The gastric balloon was inflated in all cases with a median volume of 285 mL air (range 50-500 mL), while the oesophageal balloon was inflated in 22 (27.5%) cases with a median volume of 100 mL air (range 20-500 mL)(Table 2). Documentation of devices used to maintain traction on the inflated SBT was very inconsistent.Repeat gastroscopy was performed in 61 (76.3%) patients and generally occurred in the following 24 to 48 h after the index gastroscopy with repeat endoscopic therapy performed in 33.8% (27 patients).Patients that did not undergo repeat gastroscopy had rapidly deteriorated and died.

    Table 2 Management of index variceal bleed and characteristics around insertion of Sengstaken-Blakemore tube

    Mortality, re-bleeding and balloon tamponade complication outcomes

    The outcomes of mortality, re-bleeding and complications from balloon tamponade are summarised in Figure 1 and Table 3. Inpatient mortality was 48.8% (39 deaths), and the mortality rates at 6-, 26- and 52 wk were 48.8% (39 deaths), 51.2% (41 deaths) and 53.8% (43 deaths), respectively. The causes of death during the index inpatient hospitalisation included refractory bleeding with failure to achieve haemostasis (20, 51.3%), sepsis with multiorgan failure (14, 35.9%), aspiration pneumonia (3, 7.7%) and 1 patient died from an oesophageal perforation due to SBT (2.6%). This patient had his initial gastroscopy and SBT inserted in a regional hospital prior to transfer, where a chest X-ray revealed the gastric balloonwas either inflated or migrated into the oesophagus and caused perforation and mediastinitis.

    Figure 1 Schematic for mortality outcome at 52 wk for patients requiring SBT for acute severe variceal bleeding. SBT: Sengstaken-Blakemore tube; TIPS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt.

    Table 3 Patient outcomes following Sengstaken-Blakemore Tube insertion

    The insertion of SBT successfully achieved primary haemostasis in 73 (91.3%) patients, with no survivors amongst those where this was not achieved. Re-bleeding occurred in 34.2% (25) after achieving primary haemostasis, of which further balloon tamponade was performed in 16 of these patients. Of the 25 patients who had experienced re-bleeding, the inpatient mortality rate was 76.0%.TIPS was performed in 17 (21.3%) patients at a median of 2.95 d from balloon tamponade insertion, of which 5 patients died. One patient underwent liver transplantation and survived.

    Complications associated with SBT insertion were documented in 19 (23.8%) patients. The most common complication (17, 89.5%) was superficial mucosal trauma without perforation which was managed conservatively. Only a few serious complications occurred in 5 patients (6.3%) and included aspiration pneumonia recorded in 4 patients (of which 2 died during the index hospitalisation) and 1 patient died from oesophageal perforation as mentioned above.

    Predictors of mortality, re-bleeding and complications of balloon tamponade

    As most patients who survived their hospital admission continued to survive to 52 wk after the index variceal bleed, the mortality rates and thus the predictors on univariate and multivariate analyses are very similar for all study time points. Subsequently results for predictors will be presented for the primary endpoint of 6 wk mortality after index variceal bleed for cirrhotic patients only (n =75).

    Upon univariate analyses, variables that significantly predicted 6 wk mortality included: Markers of liver disease severity (Child-Pugh score, MELD score, international normalised ratio, bilirubin, serum creatinine and sodium), pH and serum lactate, the presence of HCC, the AIMS65 score and re-bleeding.Of the validated upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk scoring algorithms used to predict outcomes, only the AIMS65 score[16] reached significance at univariate analysis (OR 1.96, 95%CI 1.15- 3.35,P =0.014)while the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) (OR 0.98, 95%CI 0.86-1.15,P =0.767), pre-endoscopy and complete Rockall scores (both OR 1.44, 95%CI 0.86-2.43,P =0.168) were not significant[17-19]. Results of the univariate analyses are detailed in Table 4.

    Table 4 Predictors of 6 wk mortality after acute severe variceal bleeding requiring balloon tamponade

    To avoid collinearity, the only liver disease severity indicator used in the multivariate analysis was the MELD score. MELD scores of > 19 have been shown to predict 6 wk mortality of > 20% for AVB[20].Predictors of 6 wk mortality on multivariate analysis in this cohort showed that the MELD score, the presence of HCC and re-bleeding were statistically significant independent predictors.

    The survival curves over 52 wk for MELD score >19, HCC and re-bleeding are shown in Figures 2-4,respectively.

    Figure 2 Survival curve for Model for Endstage Liver disease score > 19 over 52 wk. MELD score: Model for end-stage liver disease score.

    Figure 3 Survival curve for hepatocellular carcinoma over 52 wk. HCC: Hepatocellular carcinoma.

    Figure 4 Survival curve for re-bleeding over 52 wk.

    On univariate analysis, there were no relevant predictors for re-bleeding after salvage therapy using SBT for AVB. When comparing 6 wk outcomes in those that re-bled after primary haemostasis to those that did not, re-bleeding was resulted in significantly greater mortality (76.0%vs27.1%,P< 0.001), a longer duration of mechanical ventilation (P =0.026) and higher transfusion requirements for packed red cells (P =0.001) and fresh frozen plasma (P =0.001) as shown in Table 5.

    Table 5 Outcomes for patients who re-bled after Sengstaken-Blakemore tube insertion for acute severe variceal bleeding

    Non-serious mucosal trauma which was conservatively managed was not thought to be a significant complication in the life-threatening context of refractory AVB requiring balloon tamponade. Given that the incidence of serious complications from SBT insertion were uncommon and occurred in only 5 patients, no further analyses was performed to identify predictors.

    DlSCUSSlON

    AVB represents a life-threatening emergency in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension.However, with current treatment paradigms, 6 wk mortality has improved to 10%-15%[21]. Variceal bleeding refractory to first-line therapy requiring salvage therapy with balloon tamponade reflects a serious life-threatening condition in advanced liver disease that is associated with significant mortality.We demonstrate a 6 wk mortality rate of 48.8% in this cohort of patients despite current standards of care. Balloon tamponade with a SBT was found to be a very effective rescue therapy in refractory AVB,achieving primary haemostasis in 91.3% of patients with a low serious complication rate of 6.3%. On multivariate analysis, increasing MELD score, the presence of HCC and re-bleeding were all associated with a significantly increased odds of mortality.

    This study represents one of the largest series to examine the efficacy of SBT in patients presenting with AVB treated with current standards of care; an era where nearly all patients routinely receive vasoactive therapy and IV antibiotics, timely access to emergency endoscopic therapies and access to early TIPS. Balloon tamponade now represents a rescue therapy utilised in the 10-20% of patients with AVB in whom haemostasis cannot be achieved with vasoactive therapy and endoscopic techniques such as EVBL. Our 6 wk mortality rate of 48.8% is comparable to other modern cohorts at 41%-60%[4,13,14].In comparison with older cohorts from 1970-1980s with pooled 30-day to 6 wk mortality rates of 32.5%[1], the modern studies counterintuitively demonstrate a higher mortality rate. However, the historical cohorts often used balloon tamponade as a first-line treatment option and thus the cohorts are not readily comparable. Interestingly, in 2017 Nadleret al[13] reported similar survival rates to our study even though the rate of TIPS performed was much higher than in our cohort at 55.9% overall (19 of 34 patients). In our cohort, only 21.3% underwent TIPS at a median of 70.8 h (IQR 34.3-97.4 h) although variability in both expertise and availability of this radiological procedure throughout the years in our health services may have existed and the proportion of patients in whom TIPS may have been contraindicated remains unclear. Consideration of early TIPS insertion is currently recommended in all Child Pugh C patients and Child Pugh B patients with active bleeding who present with AVB[22]. TIPS placement is generally performed within 72 h (but ideally within 24 h) due to a high risk of treatment failure[7]. The early re-bleeding rate of 34.2% and high associated mortality found in our cohort highlights the propensity for serious complications in patients with AVB refractory to first-line treatments. Thus, if TIPS is considered in this cohort of patients, it should ideally be performed as soon as possible after primary haemostasis is achieved while the patient remains haemodynamically stable.

    This study supports previous evidence that balloon tamponade with a SBT remains very effective at achieving primary haemostasis in 91.3%. Of the 7 patients who did not achieve primary haemostasis, all had clinical evidence of ongoing bleeding despite SBT placement and rapidly deteriorated with haemodynamic instability and death within h despite maximal vasopressor and inotropic support.Apart from 1 patient where the gastric balloon was inflated to 100 mL, all others had inflation of the gastric balloon to adequate volumes (250-400 mL) with the oesophageal balloon also documented to be inflated in 2 patients. Our rates of primary haemostasis are comparable with historical larger cohorts published in the 1970 and 1980s at 90.7% and 88.5%[11,23]. However, compared to the other current studies, our rates of primary haemostasis are higher than those reported by Choiet al[14] and Escorsellet al[4] at 75.8% and 47%, respectively. Our re-bleeding rates lie between that of the 1970-1980s cohort(43%)[11] and Choiet al(22%)[14], and similarly we did not identify any significant relevant predictors for re-bleeding. We have showed that re-bleeding was also associated with greater mortality (76.1%vs27.1%,P =0.001) and required greater use of resources including blood products and mechanical ventilation. However, the serious complication rates of 6.3% we observed from SBT insertion was significantly lower than studies from the 1970s-1980s (approximately 32%)[1,11].

    In our study, the main predictors of 6 wk mortality on univariate and multivariate analysis were similar to those previously reported for AVB in cirrhosis and largely reflect liver disease severity eg.Child-Pugh and MELD scores (and its components) or severe biochemical systemic disturbance eg. pH and lactate[14,24]. In terms of validated tools for prognostication of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, we identified that the AIMS65 score significantly predicted 6 wk mortality but not the GBS or Rockall scores. A previous study has also demonstrated superiority of the AIMS65 score over the GBS and preendoscopy Rockall scores[25]. In addition, we also found advanced HCC and re-bleeding independently predicted 6 wk mortality. With regards to advanced HCC, 9 of 11 patients with SBT for acute severe variceal bleeding died during the admission suggesting that the utility of this SBT in this patient subgroup needs to be considered in context of the futility of the situation, particularly as it is inevitably resource-heavy, requiring invasive monitoring and intensive care admission.

    We also identified significant variability amongst several aspects of clinical practice around SBT insertion at our centres, particularly around the inflation volumes of air into the gastric and oesophageal balloons. General guidelines[3] have recommended approximately 250-400 mL insertion of air into the gastric balloon based on clinical assessment, however 20.0% used < 250 mL with several of these noting migration of the SBT on confirmation chest X-ray due to under-filling. The oesophageal balloon is generally inflated to 25-40 mmHg or approximately 150 mL however 45.5% of oesophageal balloons were inflated to < 70 mL which is likely inadequate. Varying degrees of experience are expected with SBT insertion as most centres may only encounter this situation a few times every year, and formalised training is likely beneficial to optimise survival rates by appropriate tamponade technique and to prevent complications of oesophageal perforation, which may occur with balloon migration into the oesophagus from under-filling the gastric balloon. A previous survey of United States gastroenterologists and hepatologists from the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases found that most respondents had not received training for balloon tamponade over the last 2 years and no trainees at that time were comfortable with balloon tamponade[26].

    This cohort study has certain limitations, particularly its retrospective nature and that identification of the study population relies on accurate coding. However, due to the infrequent need for this procedure, prospective data collection remains challenging. While there was variation in SBT balloon volume inflation, which may result in suboptimal use of this technique, this is the only study that attempts to provide the technical information surrounding this procedure in a real world cohort. Also,none of the patients at any of our health centres had oesophageal stents inserted for haemostasis in the study time period, which have more recently been shown to be superior to balloon tamponade[4].Nonetheless, to our knowledge this is the largest cohort study available in the current era with most patients treated according to clinical practice guidelines. Other modern cohort studies of acute severe variceal bleeding requiring balloon tamponade remain scarce and the SBT insertion was often not performed by trained specialist gastroenterologists.

    CONCLUSlON

    In conclusion, in the modern era of standardised medical and endoscopic therapies to treat AVB,salvage techniques such as balloon tamponade remain relevant for the time being. Overall, this condition remains associated with a high mortality of approximately 50% and although rates of primary haemostasis remain excellent, rates of re-bleeding occur in around one third of cases with high rates of subsequent death. These outcomes have not significantly changed when compared with the 1970-1980s even with improved therapies. However, rates of serious complications are low. Patients who survived the admission were likely to survive until at least 52 wk. Independent predictors for mortality include a higher MELD score, re-bleeding and advanced HCC which may assist in further stratification of at-risk individuals for either early definitive therapy with TIPS or early palliation.

    ARTlCLE HlGHLlGHTS

    Research background

    Salvage treatment using balloon tamponade techniques such as Sengstaken-Blakemore tubes (SBT)represents the most severe end of the spectrum of acute variceal bleeding (AVB), where failure to achieve primary haemostasis inevitably results in death. However, few studies report on the clinical practice and outcomes of this procedure in the current era, and only include small study populations where balloon tamponade is often performed by non-specialists in the emergency department setting.This retrospective multi-centre cohort study is the largest study including 80 patients over a decade who have undergone SBT for salvage therapy performed by gastroenterologists during endoscopy in tertiary hospitals. This study provides detailed technical aspects of the SBT insertion procedure and provides insight into the success rate, clinical outcomes of patients who undergo SBT insertion for refractory AVB and predictors of mortality, re-bleeding and complications from SBT.

    Research motivation

    The main topics of this study include detailed descriptions regarding the real-world practice of SBT performed by gastroenterologists in tertiary hospitals, and the clinical outcomes and predictors of shortand long-term mortality after SBT for AVB, the success rate of balloon tamponade in achieving primary haemostasis and the rate of re-bleeding and complications arising from SBT insertion. Information regarding these topics are not currently available for the current era which significantly differs from historical cohorts from the 1970-1980s due to a very different patient population where balloon tamponade was often first-line therapy. Currently, there are clear expert opinion-based consensus guidelines using a range of medical and endoscopic therapies and definitive treatment with radiologic procedures or liver transplantation for AVB. Furthermore, performing salvage technique with SBT is highly resource-intense and thus appropriate risk stratification to optimise outcomes for patients is required.

    Research objectives

    To assess the primary outcome which was all-cause mortality of AVB requiring SBT in the short-term (6 wk) as well as long-term (52 wk) and the secondary outcomes of re-bleeding and complications after SBT insertion. The predictors of these outcomes were also analysed. These objectives were all achieved apart from the predictors of complications from SBT as serious complications were infrequent.

    Research methods

    Due to the infrequent need to perform SBT for AVB, an appropriate method to undertake this study resulted in a multi-centre retrospective cohort study including 80 adult patients with SBT for refractory AVB from 2008 to 2019. The study population was identified using International Classification of Diseases-10 codes and clinical data was collected from medical records. Descriptive statistics, univariate and multivariate binomial regression and survival analyses were used to analyse the data collected.

    Research results

    SBT salvage for refractory AVB is a life-threatening condition with high mortality rates of 48.8% at 6 wk and 53.8% at 52 wk. The SBT procedure was highly successful in achieving primary haemostasis in 91.3% of patients but re-bleeding was common at 34.2% and associated with very high mortality of 76.0%. The predictors of mortality after SBT insertion included increased severity of liver disease, severe metabolic disturbance, presence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and re-bleeding. Serious complications from SBT insertion were uncommon at 6.3% and the main complications were superficial mucosal trauma without perforation which was managed conservatively. Despite this procedure being performed by specialist gastroenterologists in this study, there was still significant variation amongst technical aspects of the SBT procedure particularly amongst gastric and oesophageal balloon inflation volumes.

    Research conclusions

    In the current era, SBT as a salvage therapy for refractory AVB continues to be associated with high short and long-term mortality rates. The utilisation of this temporising procedure remains relevant and is associated with high rates of primary haemostasis over 90%. As the mortality rate exceeds 75% after re-bleeding, this highlights the importance of prompt treatment with definitive therapies such as transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts to optimise clinical outcomes. Furthermore, as SBT is associated with intense use of resources with even greater mortality in the presence of advanced HCC,this study suggests early palliation may be more appropriate in this futile setting.

    Research perspectives

    Future directions of this research should focus on strategies to optimise the clinical outcomes for this cohort of severe refractory AVB including prevention, the use of covered self-expandable oesophageal stents and prompt transition to definitive treatments before re-bleeding occurs. Further studies into risk stratification for optimal outcomes is required as well to assist clinicians in decision making regarding whether or not salvage therapy should be performed at all.

    FOOTNOTES

    Author contributions:Keung C designed the study, collected and analysed data and wrote the manuscript; Morgan A collected data and wrote the manuscript; Le ST reviewed the statistical analysis and performed critical revisions of the manuscript; Robertson M performed critical revisions of the manuscript; Urquhart P performed critical revisions of the manuscript; Swan M designed and supervised the study and performed critical revisions of the manuscript.

    lnstitutional review board statement:This study was reviewed and approved by the Monash Health Human Research Ethics Committee (RES-21-0000-218Q-70254).

    lnformed consent statement:Patients were not required to give informed consent to this study and the analysis used anonymous clinical data.

    Conflict-of-interest statement:All authors declare no conflicts-of-interest related to this article.

    Data sharing statement:No additional data are available.

    STROBE statement:All authors have read the STROBE Statement checklist of items and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the STROBE Statement checklist of items.

    Open-Access:This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

    Country/Territory of origin:Australia

    ORClD number:Charlotte Y Keung 0000-0002-7040-3441; Suong T Le 0000-0003-3305-4999; Marcus Robertson 0000-0002-8848-1771; Michael P Swan 0000-0001-8036-5613.

    Corresponding Author's Membership in Professional Societies:Gastroenterological Society of Australia, 100139.

    S-Editor:Wang LL

    L-Editor:A

    P-Editor:Wang LL

    国产在视频线精品| 纯流量卡能插随身wifi吗| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 欧美亚洲日本最大视频资源| 午夜福利,免费看| 国产精品 国内视频| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频 | 欧美精品亚洲一区二区| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 狠狠婷婷综合久久久久久88av| 91成年电影在线观看| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 欧美日韩成人在线一区二区| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| www.熟女人妻精品国产| 国产一区二区在线观看av| 热99re8久久精品国产| 久久久久久亚洲精品国产蜜桃av| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 超色免费av| 精品熟女少妇八av免费久了| 视频区图区小说| 亚洲第一欧美日韩一区二区三区 | 黄色成人免费大全| 久久国产精品男人的天堂亚洲| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 国产精品久久久久久人妻精品电影 | 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 日本精品一区二区三区蜜桃| 国产精品偷伦视频观看了| 国产人伦9x9x在线观看| 999精品在线视频| 日韩欧美三级三区| 久9热在线精品视频| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 国产不卡一卡二| 51午夜福利影视在线观看| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 99国产精品一区二区三区| 午夜福利视频在线观看免费| 国产av精品麻豆| 亚洲人成伊人成综合网2020| 女人爽到高潮嗷嗷叫在线视频| 十八禁高潮呻吟视频| 人人妻人人澡人人爽人人夜夜| 欧美日韩福利视频一区二区| 一级毛片电影观看| 免费在线观看日本一区| 欧美日韩av久久| 中国美女看黄片| 日韩三级视频一区二区三区| 久久免费观看电影| 99热网站在线观看| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 在线观看66精品国产| 在线观看66精品国产| 老司机靠b影院| 蜜桃国产av成人99| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 亚洲三区欧美一区| 伦理电影免费视频| av一本久久久久| 久久青草综合色| av不卡在线播放| 蜜桃国产av成人99| 在线观看人妻少妇| 久久久久久久国产电影| 啦啦啦免费观看视频1| 成人精品一区二区免费| 欧美精品一区二区免费开放| 国产熟女午夜一区二区三区| 日韩中文字幕视频在线看片| 搡老乐熟女国产| 亚洲av成人一区二区三| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 日韩精品免费视频一区二区三区| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产精品 国内视频| 久久久精品国产亚洲av高清涩受| 成人三级做爰电影| 丁香六月欧美| 亚洲专区国产一区二区| 老熟女久久久| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 国产精品.久久久| 久久这里只有精品19| 亚洲精品av麻豆狂野| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| 国产福利在线免费观看视频| 国产在线精品亚洲第一网站| 亚洲av成人不卡在线观看播放网| 高清黄色对白视频在线免费看| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 又紧又爽又黄一区二区| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 久久久久视频综合| 中文亚洲av片在线观看爽 | 黄色视频不卡| 首页视频小说图片口味搜索| 国产精品亚洲一级av第二区| 捣出白浆h1v1| 久久精品国产99精品国产亚洲性色 | 国产欧美日韩一区二区三区在线| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 国产精品免费大片| 久久久久久人人人人人| 亚洲九九香蕉| 制服人妻中文乱码| 成人av一区二区三区在线看| 性色av乱码一区二区三区2| 国产亚洲欧美精品永久| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 国产亚洲午夜精品一区二区久久| 久久久久久人人人人人| 亚洲精品中文字幕一二三四区 | 成人免费观看视频高清| 国产成人啪精品午夜网站| 一区二区三区激情视频| 99精国产麻豆久久婷婷| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 一区二区三区激情视频| 午夜福利免费观看在线| www.精华液| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 久久中文字幕一级| 国产精品一区二区免费欧美| 亚洲国产毛片av蜜桃av| 两性夫妻黄色片| 色播在线永久视频| 国产欧美日韩一区二区三| 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 国产av一区二区精品久久| 国产免费福利视频在线观看| 国产成人精品久久二区二区91| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 91成人精品电影| av有码第一页| 18禁美女被吸乳视频| videosex国产| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 男人舔女人的私密视频| 嫩草影视91久久| 一本一本久久a久久精品综合妖精| 久久天躁狠狠躁夜夜2o2o| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 一本大道久久a久久精品| 狠狠精品人妻久久久久久综合| 宅男免费午夜| 老鸭窝网址在线观看| 黄色片一级片一级黄色片| 50天的宝宝边吃奶边哭怎么回事| 国产免费视频播放在线视频| 国产一区二区三区视频了| 99精品欧美一区二区三区四区| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 黄色a级毛片大全视频| 欧美日韩亚洲高清精品| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 亚洲五月婷婷丁香| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人 | 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 久久热在线av| 欧美性长视频在线观看| 黄网站色视频无遮挡免费观看| 国产淫语在线视频| 黄频高清免费视频| 日韩大码丰满熟妇| 亚洲色图 男人天堂 中文字幕| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 飞空精品影院首页| 精品高清国产在线一区| 妹子高潮喷水视频| 老汉色av国产亚洲站长工具| 757午夜福利合集在线观看| 亚洲欧美精品综合一区二区三区| 女人久久www免费人成看片| 美女高潮到喷水免费观看| 国产精品av久久久久免费| a级毛片在线看网站| 操出白浆在线播放| 久久国产精品人妻蜜桃| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 免费少妇av软件| 国产有黄有色有爽视频| 99久久精品国产亚洲精品| 国产精品电影一区二区三区 | 色视频在线一区二区三区| 9热在线视频观看99| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 成人亚洲精品一区在线观看| 日韩有码中文字幕| 9191精品国产免费久久| av在线播放免费不卡| 亚洲国产欧美一区二区综合| 夫妻午夜视频| 99九九在线精品视频| 老熟女久久久| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| bbb黄色大片| av电影中文网址| 丝瓜视频免费看黄片| 欧美激情高清一区二区三区| 18在线观看网站| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 极品教师在线免费播放| 成在线人永久免费视频| 91国产中文字幕| 18禁裸乳无遮挡动漫免费视频| 不卡av一区二区三区| 午夜精品国产一区二区电影| 在线永久观看黄色视频| 亚洲一区二区三区欧美精品| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 精品福利永久在线观看| 大码成人一级视频| 午夜福利影视在线免费观看| 亚洲第一av免费看| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 国产成人av教育| 成人精品一区二区免费| 国产在线一区二区三区精| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 亚洲色图av天堂| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 最近最新免费中文字幕在线| 丰满迷人的少妇在线观看| 另类精品久久| 国产在线免费精品| 精品一区二区三区四区五区乱码| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| www.自偷自拍.com| 午夜福利在线免费观看网站| 亚洲成a人片在线一区二区| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 亚洲美女黄片视频| 在线看a的网站| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 精品国产亚洲在线| 国产在线视频一区二区| 日本wwww免费看| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 老汉色∧v一级毛片| 欧美 日韩 精品 国产| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 亚洲精品国产精品久久久不卡| 欧美在线一区亚洲| 一进一出抽搐动态| 一级毛片精品| 精品亚洲成国产av| 91成年电影在线观看| 操美女的视频在线观看| 91九色精品人成在线观看| 97人妻天天添夜夜摸| 欧美精品av麻豆av| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 国产成人精品久久二区二区免费| 亚洲午夜精品一区,二区,三区| 亚洲熟女毛片儿| 亚洲精品久久成人aⅴ小说| 91国产中文字幕| 美国免费a级毛片| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 久久中文字幕一级| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 久久热在线av| 久久亚洲真实| av网站在线播放免费| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 久久中文看片网| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 一级毛片女人18水好多| 在线观看免费视频日本深夜| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 国产片内射在线| 伊人久久大香线蕉亚洲五| 国产成人精品无人区| 人人妻人人添人人爽欧美一区卜| av线在线观看网站| 久久精品国产亚洲av高清一级| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 亚洲国产成人一精品久久久| 色94色欧美一区二区| 国产精品亚洲av一区麻豆| 国产老妇伦熟女老妇高清| 久久久久精品人妻al黑| 操美女的视频在线观看| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 精品亚洲乱码少妇综合久久| 国产成人精品无人区| 欧美日韩亚洲国产一区二区在线观看 | 亚洲伊人久久精品综合| 国产男女内射视频| 欧美成人午夜精品| 99国产精品免费福利视频| 国产欧美日韩综合在线一区二区| 亚洲av成人一区二区三| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 麻豆av在线久日| 精品国内亚洲2022精品成人 | 老司机在亚洲福利影院| 人妻一区二区av| 无人区码免费观看不卡 | 欧美日韩亚洲综合一区二区三区_| 老司机福利观看| 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 天堂动漫精品| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 国产精品熟女久久久久浪| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 99热国产这里只有精品6| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 久9热在线精品视频| 中文字幕精品免费在线观看视频| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 色综合婷婷激情| 岛国毛片在线播放| 久久国产亚洲av麻豆专区| 久久av网站| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 18禁国产床啪视频网站| 久久午夜综合久久蜜桃| 亚洲第一青青草原| 欧美久久黑人一区二区| 男女床上黄色一级片免费看| 怎么达到女性高潮| 欧美激情 高清一区二区三区| 久久久久精品国产欧美久久久| 欧美黑人精品巨大| 久久久精品94久久精品| a级片在线免费高清观看视频| √禁漫天堂资源中文www| 久久狼人影院| 国产男女内射视频| av欧美777| 午夜激情久久久久久久| 久久狼人影院| 一级毛片电影观看| 欧美午夜高清在线| 欧美国产精品一级二级三级| 中文字幕制服av| 亚洲av国产av综合av卡| 成人精品一区二区免费| 国产主播在线观看一区二区| 日韩有码中文字幕| 色老头精品视频在线观看| 久久久国产精品麻豆| 一级毛片电影观看| 日本五十路高清| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 中文字幕色久视频| 男女免费视频国产| 日本一区二区免费在线视频| 欧美乱码精品一区二区三区| 涩涩av久久男人的天堂| av网站免费在线观看视频| 亚洲专区字幕在线| 亚洲av美国av| 正在播放国产对白刺激| 国产又色又爽无遮挡免费看| 亚洲国产av影院在线观看| 免费在线观看影片大全网站| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 超碰成人久久| 精品久久久久久久毛片微露脸| 国产一区二区 视频在线| 国产一区有黄有色的免费视频| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 精品久久久精品久久久| 国产不卡av网站在线观看| 国产色视频综合| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 久久精品国产亚洲av香蕉五月 | a在线观看视频网站| 亚洲精品久久午夜乱码| 国产男靠女视频免费网站| a在线观看视频网站| netflix在线观看网站| 欧美 亚洲 国产 日韩一| 亚洲一区中文字幕在线| 亚洲精品美女久久久久99蜜臀| 777米奇影视久久| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 日韩欧美免费精品| 国产1区2区3区精品| av视频免费观看在线观看| 国产成人免费观看mmmm| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 国产色视频综合| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 中亚洲国语对白在线视频| av电影中文网址| 黑丝袜美女国产一区| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 777米奇影视久久| 免费黄频网站在线观看国产| 视频区图区小说| 亚洲精品国产区一区二| 最近最新中文字幕大全免费视频| 高潮久久久久久久久久久不卡| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 欧美精品一区二区大全| 成人国语在线视频| 亚洲专区中文字幕在线| 视频在线观看一区二区三区| 久久久精品94久久精品| 少妇粗大呻吟视频| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区黑人| 9色porny在线观看| 国产成人系列免费观看| bbb黄色大片| 亚洲精品成人av观看孕妇| 国产精品一区二区在线观看99| 国产精品一区二区在线不卡| 少妇精品久久久久久久| 欧美人与性动交α欧美精品济南到| 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 亚洲人成77777在线视频| 天堂8中文在线网| 亚洲国产看品久久| 菩萨蛮人人尽说江南好唐韦庄| 动漫黄色视频在线观看| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 正在播放国产对白刺激| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 久久香蕉激情| 一区二区三区激情视频| 日韩视频一区二区在线观看| 色婷婷久久久亚洲欧美| 在线观看免费日韩欧美大片| 黑人巨大精品欧美一区二区蜜桃| 亚洲综合色网址| kizo精华| 精品高清国产在线一区| 久久久久久久精品吃奶| 久久久精品区二区三区| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 国产xxxxx性猛交| 伦理电影免费视频| 五月开心婷婷网| 一本综合久久免费| 久久久久国内视频| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 大陆偷拍与自拍| 丁香六月欧美| 下体分泌物呈黄色| 日本a在线网址| 真人做人爱边吃奶动态| 黄色视频不卡| 国产av国产精品国产| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 女人精品久久久久毛片| 午夜视频精品福利| 日本av免费视频播放| 变态另类成人亚洲欧美熟女 | 91精品三级在线观看| 久久ye,这里只有精品| 国产精品久久久av美女十八| 一区在线观看完整版| 女同久久另类99精品国产91| 国产亚洲精品久久久久5区| 9191精品国产免费久久| 亚洲精品粉嫩美女一区| 黄色怎么调成土黄色| 欧美黄色片欧美黄色片| 中文字幕最新亚洲高清| 午夜福利一区二区在线看| 亚洲综合色网址| 在线观看一区二区三区激情| 成年女人毛片免费观看观看9 | 精品少妇一区二区三区视频日本电影| 国产精品 国内视频| 激情在线观看视频在线高清 | 99精品久久久久人妻精品| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 精品国产超薄肉色丝袜足j| 又大又爽又粗| 久热爱精品视频在线9| 一级,二级,三级黄色视频| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 亚洲欧美一区二区三区久久| 成人国产一区最新在线观看| tocl精华| 亚洲国产欧美日韩在线播放| 国产色视频综合| 侵犯人妻中文字幕一二三四区| 一级片免费观看大全| 老熟妇乱子伦视频在线观看| 精品免费久久久久久久清纯 | 久久99热这里只频精品6学生| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看 | 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 法律面前人人平等表现在哪些方面| av在线播放免费不卡| 人妻久久中文字幕网| 巨乳人妻的诱惑在线观看| 欧美另类亚洲清纯唯美| 99re在线观看精品视频| 美女扒开内裤让男人捅视频| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 男女高潮啪啪啪动态图| 在线观看免费视频网站a站| 国产男女内射视频| 热99久久久久精品小说推荐| 久久久久久久久免费视频了| 国产一区二区激情短视频| 丁香六月欧美| 色94色欧美一区二区| 丝袜美足系列| 国产一区二区三区在线臀色熟女 | 九色亚洲精品在线播放| 他把我摸到了高潮在线观看 | 久久午夜亚洲精品久久| 成人永久免费在线观看视频 | 搡老熟女国产l中国老女人| videosex国产| 啦啦啦中文免费视频观看日本| 91麻豆精品激情在线观看国产 | h视频一区二区三区| 亚洲avbb在线观看| 久久亚洲精品不卡| 国产片内射在线| 高清视频免费观看一区二区| 国产成人免费无遮挡视频| 一个人免费在线观看的高清视频| 精品久久久精品久久久| 亚洲九九香蕉| 国产精品久久久久久精品电影小说| 国产黄色免费在线视频| 久久婷婷成人综合色麻豆| 一进一出抽搐动态| 国产深夜福利视频在线观看| av福利片在线| videos熟女内射| 老司机午夜福利在线观看视频 | 久久久久久久久久久久大奶| 一级a爱视频在线免费观看| 亚洲精品自拍成人| 久久久精品区二区三区| 99香蕉大伊视频| 午夜视频精品福利| 国产在线免费精品| 亚洲精华国产精华精| 黄色视频在线播放观看不卡| 久久免费观看电影| 国产日韩欧美视频二区| 亚洲一卡2卡3卡4卡5卡精品中文| 女人高潮潮喷娇喘18禁视频| 精品久久蜜臀av无| 80岁老熟妇乱子伦牲交| 精品第一国产精品| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 在线播放国产精品三级| 精品一区二区三卡| 亚洲欧洲精品一区二区精品久久久| 国产欧美日韩精品亚洲av| 中文字幕高清在线视频| 肉色欧美久久久久久久蜜桃| 在线十欧美十亚洲十日本专区| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 中文字幕av电影在线播放| 午夜福利免费观看在线| 欧美人与性动交α欧美软件| 亚洲国产精品一区二区三区在线| 国产精品一区二区精品视频观看| 日韩人妻精品一区2区三区| 亚洲欧美激情在线| 后天国语完整版免费观看| 天天躁夜夜躁狠狠躁躁| 日韩一卡2卡3卡4卡2021年| 国产日韩欧美在线精品| 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 精品一品国产午夜福利视频| 亚洲精品国产色婷婷电影| 亚洲男人天堂网一区| 亚洲中文日韩欧美视频| 久久人妻熟女aⅴ| 欧美日韩精品网址| 如日韩欧美国产精品一区二区三区| 91字幕亚洲| 可以免费在线观看a视频的电影网站| 欧美变态另类bdsm刘玥| 窝窝影院91人妻| 国产伦人伦偷精品视频| 麻豆成人av在线观看| 国产精品美女特级片免费视频播放器 | 大片电影免费在线观看免费| 亚洲第一青青草原| 日日爽夜夜爽网站| 日韩成人在线观看一区二区三区| 国产精品九九99| 色综合婷婷激情| 99国产精品一区二区蜜桃av | 亚洲色图av天堂| 亚洲天堂av无毛| 自线自在国产av| 自拍欧美九色日韩亚洲蝌蚪91| 精品人妻在线不人妻| 精品少妇久久久久久888优播| 成在线人永久免费视频|