Combined Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Plus Variceal Obliteration versus Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Alone for the Management of Gastric Varices: Comparative Single-Center Clinical Outcomes

Evaluation and clinical significance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound on changes in liver blood flow perfusion after TIPS surgery

To investigate the clinical value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the prediction of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) in patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis after intrahepatic portal-systemic shunt via jugular vein. In this retrospective study, we collected data from 75 patients with hepatitis B, cirrhosis, and portal hypertension who underwent jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt from February 2019 to February 2022. The diagnostic instrument used was the TOSHIBA Aplio500 color Doppler ultrasound with contrast-enhanced ultrasound capabilities. The trial group comprised 20 patients with HE within 3 months postsurgery, while the control group (CG) included 55 patients without HE within the same postoperative period. All patients underwent various examinations before and within 48 hours after surgery, including observation of liver and spleen size and stent position, as well as assessment of blood flow direction in portal and hepatic veins. Subsequently, contrast-enhanced ultrasound was employed to examine and observe perfusion changes of contrast agents in hepatic veins, hepatic arteries, and portal veins (PV). Changes in PV pressure gradient, intrahepatic, and stent blood flow perfusion (BFP) were explored in both postoperative trials and CGs. The trial group exhibited higher BFP volume, PV pressure gradient difference, and percentage decrease compared to the CG. A weak positive correlation was observed between blood flow within the liver stent and PV pressure gradient difference, as well as the percentage decrease in PV pressure gradient. The correlation coefficient between blood flowing perfusion volume within the stent and the difference in PV pressure gradient was R = 0.415 (P = .000). The correlating coefficient between BFP amount within the stent and the percentage decrease in PV pressure gradient was R = 0.261 (P = .027). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for stent perfusion volume, difference in PV pressure gradient, and percentage decrease in PV pressure gradient was 0.691, 0.759, and 0.742, respectively. An increase in PV pressure gradient accelerates blood flow within the stent, predisposing to HE. Changes in hepatic BFP following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt can effectively predict the occurrence of HE, demonstrating significant clinical relevance.

Efficacy of TIPS plus extrahepatic collateral embolisation in real-world data: a validation study

OBJECTIVES

The efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) plus extrahepatic collateral embolisation (TIPS+E) in reducing rebleeding and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) post-TIPS was recently reported in a meta-analysis, but further validation is essential. This study aims to confirm the effectiveness of TIPS+E using real-world data.

METHODS

The multicentre retrospective cohort included 2077 patients with cirrhosis who underwent TIPS±E (TIPS: 631, TIPS+E: 1446) between January 2010 and December 2022. Regression and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to adjust for baseline characteristic differences. After PSM, clinical outcomes, including rebleeding, HE, survival and further decompensation (FDC), were analysed. Baseline data from all patients contributed to the construction of prognostic models.

RESULTS

After PSM, 1136 matched patients (TIPS+E: TIPS=568:568) were included. TIPS+E demonstrated a significant reduction in rebleeding (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.59 to 0.99; p=0.04), HE (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99; p=0.04) and FDC (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99; p=0.04), comparing to TIPS. Significantly, TIPS+E also reduced rebleeding, HE and FDC in subgroup of using 8 mm diameter stents and embolising of gastric varices+spontaneous portosystemic shunts (GV+SPSS). However, there were no differences in overall or subgroup survival analysis. Additionally, the random forest models showed higher accuracy and AUROC comparing to other models. Controlling post-TIPS portal pressure gradient (pPPG) within 7 mm Hg

CONCLUSION

Our real-world data validation confirms the high efficacy of TIPS+E in reducing rebleeding and HE, particularly when using 8 mm diameter stents, embolising GV+SPSS and maintaining an optimal pPPG.

Collapse

Key Words

• GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING
• HEPATIC ENCEPHALOPATHY
• INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY
• LIVER CIRRHOSIS
• PORTAL HYPERTENSION

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Humans
• Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic
• Retrospective Studies
• Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/surgery
• Esophageal and Gastric Varices/surgery
• Liver Cirrhosis/complications
• Liver Cirrhosis/surgery
• Hepatic Encephalopathy

Collapse

Grants

• National Natural Science Foundation of China
• Department of Health of Shandong Province

Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Lianhui Zhao Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China
Jun Tie Department of Liver Diseases and Digestive Interventional Radiology, National Clinical Research Centre for Digestive Diseases and Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, Xian, Shaanxi, People's Republic of China
Guangchuan Wang Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China
Zhengjie Li School of Automation, Qingdao University, Qingdao, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China
Jiao Xu Department of Liver Diseases and Digestive Interventional Radiology, National Clinical Research Centre for Digestive Diseases and Xijing Hospital of Digestive Diseases, Fourth Military Medical University, Xian, Shaanxi, People's Republic of China
Yuzheng Zhuge Gastroenterology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsun Province, People's Republic of China
Feng Zhang Gastroenterology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Nanjing, Jiangsun Province, People's Republic of China
Hao Wu Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, People's Republic of China
Bo Wei Gastroenterology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, People's Republic of China
Hui Xue Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province, China
Peijie Li Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi Province, China
Wei Wu Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China
Chao Chen Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, People's Republic of China
Qiong Wu Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China
Yifu Xia Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China
Xiubin Sun Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China
Chunqing Zhang Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China

Collapse

Pre-emptive TIPS for the treatment of bleeding from gastric fundal varices: Results of a randomised controlled trial

Background & Aims

Bleeding from gastric fundal varices (isolated gastric varices type 1/gastroesophageal varices type 2) represents a major problem because of a high incidence of rebleeding and death with standard-of-care therapy (endoscopic obliteration with tissue adhesives plus pharmacological therapy). Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs) are recommended as a rescue therapy. Pre-emptive 'early' TIPS (pTIPS) significantly improves control of bleeding and survival in patients at high-risk of dying or rebleeding from esophageal varices.

Methods

This randomised controlled trial investigate whether the use of pTIPS improves rebleeding-free survival in patients with gastric fundal varices (isolated gastric varices type 1 and/or gastroesophageal varices type 2) compared with standard therapy.

Results

The study did not achieve the predefined sample size because of low recruitment. Nevertheless, pTIPS (n = 11) was more effective compared with combined endoscopic and pharmacological therapy (n = 10) in improving rebleeding-free survival (per protocol analysis: 100 vs. 28%; p = 0.017). This was mainly because of a better outcome in patients with Child-Pugh B or C scores. There were no differences in serious adverse events or in the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy among the different cohorts.

Conclusion

The use of pTIPS should be considered in patients with Child-Pugh B or C scores bleeding from gastric fundal varices.

Impact and implications

The first-line treatment of gastric fundal varices (GOV2 and/or IGV1) is the combination of pharmacological therapy and endoscopic obliteration with glue. TIPS is considered the main rescue therapy. Recent data suggest that, in patients at high-risk of dying or rebleeding (Child-Pugh C or B scores + active bleeding at endoscopy) from esophageal varices, the use of pTIPS, performed during the first 72 h from admission, results in an increased rate of control of bleeding and survival compared with combined endoscopic and pharmacological therapy. Herein, we present a randomised controlled trial comparing pTIPS with combined endoscopic (injection of glue) and pharmacological therapy (first, somatostatin or terlipressin; carvedilol after discharge) in the treatment of patients bleeding from GOV2 and/or IGV1. Although we were not able to include the calculated sample size because of the scarcity of these patients, our results show that the use of pTIPS is associated with a significantly higher actuarial rebleeding-free survival when analysed as per protocol. This is because of the greater efficacy of this treatment in patients with Child-Pugh B or C scores.

Comparative outcome of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt with or without variceal obliteration: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been used for the secondary prevention of variceal bleeding. TIPS can be combined with variceal embolization (TIPS-VO), but its benefit remains controversial. The present systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the incidence of rebleeding, adverse events, and mortality among patients with TIPS alone and with TIPS-VO.

METHODS

A literature search from January 2000 to June 2022 was done for studies comparing the outcome of patients undergoing TIPS alone or TIPS-VO. A subgroup analysis was conducted for patients undergoing TIPS with covered stents.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies with data from 1044 patients were included. The incidence of rebleeding was significantly higher in the TIPS alone group in both overall population OR 2.01 (1.42-2.83) and the subgroup (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.21-3.04). There was no difference between the two groups concerning the risk of hepatic encephalopathy (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.83-1.59), procedural adverse events (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.54-1.39), shunt dysfunction (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.82-1.75), overall mortality (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.73-1.46), and mortality due to variceal rebleeding (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.44-5.64). There was no significant heterogeneity or publication bias among the included studies. The certainty of evidence remains low for all the outcome expect for variceal rebleeding.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis provides a moderate-quality evidence for the benefit of TIPS-VO in reducing the incidence of rebleeding. However, the decision for combining variceal embolization with TIPS should be made on a case-to-case basis.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt with or without gastro-oesophageal variceal embolisation for the prevention of variceal rebleeding: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The role of variceal embolisation at the time of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for the prevention of gastro-oesophageal variceal rebleeding remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate whether adding variceal embolisation to TIPS placement could reduce the incidence of rebleeding after TIPS in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial at one university hospital in China. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with cirrhosis and had variceal bleeding in the past 6 weeks, and they were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive TIPS (with a covered stent in both groups) plus variceal embolisation (TIPS plus embolisation group) or TIPS alone (TIPS group) to prevent variceal rebleeding. Randomisation was done using a web-based randomisation system using a Pocock and Simon's minimisation method, stratified by Child-Pugh class (A vs B vs C). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; individuals involved in data analysis were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the 2-year cumulative incidence of variceal rebleeding after randomisation, and analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02119988.

FINDINGS

Between June 16, 2014, and Feb 3, 2016, 205 patients were screened, of whom 134 were randomly allocated to the TIPS plus embolisation group (n=69) and the TIPS group (n=65). TIPS placement and variceal embolisation was successful in all 134 patients, all were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the 2-year cumulative incidence of variceal rebleeding between the two groups (TIPS plus embolisation 11·6% [95% CI 4·0-19·1] vs TIPS 13·8% [5·4-22·2]; hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·42-1·61]; p=0·566). Adverse events were similar between the two groups; the most common adverse events were peptic ulcer or gastritis (12 [17%] of patients in the TIPS plus embolisation group vs 13 [20%] of patients in the TIPS group), new or worsening ascites (ten [14%] vs six [9%]), and hepatocellular carcinoma (four [6%] vs six [9%]). The numbers of deaths were also similar between groups (24 [35%] vs 25 [38%]) INTERPRETATION: Adding variceal embolisation to TIPS did not significantly reduce the incidence of variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis. Our findings do not support concomitant variceal embolisation during TIPS for the prevention of variceal rebleeding.

FUNDING

National Key Technology R&D Program, Boost Program of Xijing Hospital, and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation.

Update on the management of gastric varices

Gastro-oesophageal varices are the major clinical manifestations of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Although less frequent than oesophageal varices (EV), bleeding from gastric varices (GV) is generally more severe and associated with higher mortality and a greater risk to rebleed. According to Sarin's classification, GVs are categorized into four types based on their location within the stomach and relationship with EV. Currently, treatment options for the management of GV include beta-blockers, endoscopic band ligation, endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection, EUS-guided coil/cyanoacrylate injection, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts and balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration. The best treatment strategy of GV remains controversial because of the heterogeneity of GV, lack of high-quality data and suboptimal trial design of the studies available. The proper treatment algorithm may require adequate endoscopic and imaging evaluation by a multidisciplinary team with multiple treatment options available. This review describes the hemodynamic features of GV, pharmacological, endoscopic and interventional radiological treatment options for GV.

Friend or Foe? Spontaneous Portosystemic Shunts in Cirrhosis-Current Understanding and Future Prospects

Portal hypertension (PHT) in cirrhosis results from increased resistance to splanchnic blood flow secondary to parenchymal and vascular changes within the liver. In an attempt to counteract the increased portal pressure, two mechanisms simultaneously occur: splanchnic vasodilatation and formation of spontaneous portosystemic shunts (SPSS). Long considered to be a compensatory mechanism to decompress the portal venous system, it is now well established that SPSS are not only inefficient in decreasing the portal pressure but also contribute to reduced hepatocyte perfusion and increased splanchnic blood flow and resistance, associated with worsening PHT. Recent studies have described a high prevalence of SPSS in cirrhosis patients, increasing with liver dysfunction, and observed an association between the presence of SPSS and worse clinical outcomes. In cirrhosis patients with preserved liver functions, the presence of SPSS independently increases the risk of hepatic encephalopathy, variceal bleeding, and ascites, and reduces transplant-free survival. Moreover, the presence of SPSS in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting and liver transplant has been shown to variably affect the postprocedural outcome. This article provides an overview of the current understanding of the role of SPSS in the natural history of liver cirrhosis and their status as a therapeutic target and an imaging biomarker to identify patients at higher risk of developing complications of PHT.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation for Treatment of Gastric Varices: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

To quantify the pooled clinical outcomes of stent-graft transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for the management of gastric varices (GVs) through systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A PubMed and Embase search was performed from 2003 to 2020. Search terms included: (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt OR TIPS) AND (gastric varices OR fundal varices OR gastroesophageal varices OR gastroesophageal varices) AND (hemorrhage OR rebleeding OR rebleeding OR survival). Inclusion criteria spanned: English language studies, publication in peer reviewed journals, sample size ≥ 10, reported clinical outcome data, exclusive treatment of GVs (no esophageal varices), exclusive use of stent-grafts for TIPS, no chemical obliteration of GVs. Outcomes included GV rebleeding rate, overall rebleeding rate, GV occlusion rate, hepatic encephalopathy (HE) incidence, and adverse event (AE) rate.

RESULTS

Literature search yielded 936 articles. Of these, 5 (0.5%) retrospective observational cohort studies met inclusion criteria, spanning 209 patients (quinquagenarian men with viral or alcoholic liver disease) with GVs treated using TIPS with adjunctive coil embolization (47%). Clinical follow-up time ranged from 4.3 to 30.6 months. Outcomes included a pooled GV rebleeding rate of 15% (95% CI: 11%, 20%), total rebleeding rate of 21% (95% CI: 15%, 27%), GV occlusion rate of 33% (95% CI: 22%, 45%), HE incidence of 30% (95% CI: 24%, 36%), and AE incidence of 3% (95% CI: 1%, 8%).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of GV rebleeding after stent-graft TIPS is high. The results suggest the need for additional measures to reduce recurrent hemorrhage incidence from GVs.