Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation With Embolization or Obliteration for Variceal Bleeding

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt with or without variceal embolization to prevent variceal rebleeding: an updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an established treatment for portal hypertension complications. Still, the role of adjuvant variceal embolization is a matter of debate. Thus, we aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TIPS with variceal embolization versus TIPS alone to prevent variceal rebleeding.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used PubMed, CENTRAL, and OVID to search for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies up to 17 June 20221117 June 2022. We pooled binary outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) presented with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using RevMan 5.4.

RESULTS

We included 11 studies (two RCTs and nine observational studies) with 1024 patients. Pooled RR favored TIPS with embolization in preventing variceal rebleeding (RR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.76); however, there was no difference between the two groups regarding shunt dysfunction (RR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.68, 1.23), encephalopathy (RR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.70, 1.11), and death (RR 0.97, 95% CI: 0.77, 1.22).

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS with embolization can be an effective strategy for preventing variceal rebleeding; however, our results should be interpreted cautiously as most data were observational and the technical quality of the embolization is questionable. Further RCTs are required using the proper techniques of embolization and comparing TIPS with embolization with other treatment modalities such as endoscopic ligation, and balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration.

Comparing the predictive ability of portoatrial and portocaval gradient after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation for variceal rebleeding

BACKGROUND

Measuring the portal pressure gradient from the portal vein (PV) to the inferior vena cava (IVC) or to the right atrium (RA) remains controversial. The aim of our study was to compare the predictive ability of portoatrial gradient (PAG) and portocaval gradient (PCG) for variceal rebleeding.

METHODS

The data of 285 cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding undergoing elective transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively. The variceal rebleeding rates were compared between groups categorized by established or modified thresholds. The median follow-up time was 30.0 months.

RESULTS

After TIPS, PAG was equal to (n = 115) or more than (n = 170) PCG. The pressure of IVC was defined as an independent predictor for a PAG-PCG difference of ≥ 2 mmHg (p < 0.001, OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10-1.37). Using a threshold of 12 mmHg, PAG (p = 0.081, HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.37-1.06) could not predict variceal rebleeding but PCG could (p = 0.003, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.77). This pattern was unchanged when a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline was also considered as a threshold (PAG/PCG: p = 0.114 and 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that only in patients with post-TIPS IVC pressure < 9 mmHg (p = 0.018), PAG could predict variceal rebleeding. Because PAG was on average 1.4 mmHg higher than PCG, patients were classified by a PAG of 14 mmHg, and there was no difference in rebleeding rates between these two groups (p = 0.574).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with variceal bleeding, the predictive ability of PAG is limited. The portal pressure gradient should be measured between the PV and IVC.

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.

Evaluation and Management of Esophageal and Gastric Varices in Patients with Cirrhosis

Variceal bleeding is a complication of cirrhosis that defines decompensation. Important advances in the management of gastroesophageal varices have led to a significant decrease in the morbidity and mortality. Achieving these results in clinical practice is contingent on clinicians applying the best practice strategies and appropriate referral to a tertiary center. Several quality metrics were developed by the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. This article aims to update outpatient and inpatient strategies to include the latest recommendations on variceal screening and surveillance, primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, and therapy for patients with acute variceal bleeding.

Emergent Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation in Acute Variceal Bleeding

Emergent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation is most commonly employed in the setting of acute variceal hemorrhage. Given a propensity for decompensation, these patients often require a multidisciplinary, multimodal approach involving prompt diagnosis, pharmacologic therapy, and endoscopic intervention. While successful in the majority of cases, failure to medically control initial bleeding can prompt interventional radiology consultation for emergent portal decompression via TIPS creation. This article discusses TIPS creation in emergent, acute variceal hemorrhage, reviewing the natural history of gastroesophageal varices, presentation and diagnosis of acute variceal hemorrhage, pharmacologic therapy, endoscopic approaches, patient selection and risk stratification for TIPS, technical considerations for TIPS creation, adjunctive embolotherapy, and the role of salvage TIPS versus early TIPS in acute variceal hemorrhage.

Role of Interventional Radiology in Complications of Portal Hypertension

Portal hypertension, a consequence of end-stage liver disease and liver cirrhosis can lead to significant morbidity and mortality for patients through abnormal fluid accumulation as well as the formation of portosystemic shunts and varices. Treatment of the sequelae of portal hypertension can be achieved through endovascular management by referral to an interventional radiologist on an outpatient or emergent basis as required. Current techniques include the placement of peritoneovenous shunts and tunneled peritoneal drains, the creation of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, or the obliteration of shunts via balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO). In addition, newer procedural techniques utilizing vascular plugs and coils have reduced risks of the traditional BRTO procedure. Modified-BRTO procedures, known as plug-assisted and coil-assisted retrograde transvenous obliteration (PARTO and CARTO, respectively) have become the standard of care at many institutions for the treatment of gastric varices and portosystemic shunt-induced hepatic encephalopathy. This review examines the most recent literature of the management of portal hypertension by interventional radiologists, evaluating treatment options as well as the clinical and technical outcomes of TIPS, peritoneovenous shunts, tunneled peritoneal drains, BRTOs, and modified-BRTOs as well as future directions in the development of procedural techniques.

Unsolved Questions in Salvage TIPSS: Practical Modalities for Placement, Alternative Therapeutics, and Long-Term Outcomes

Salvage transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS) has proven its efficacy to treat refractory variceal bleeding for patients with cirrhosis. However, this procedure is associated with very poor outcomes. As it is used as a last resort to treat a severe complication of cirrhosis, it seems essential to improve our practice, with the aim of optimizing management of those patients. Somehow, many questions are still unsolved: which stents should be used? Should a concomitant embolization be systematically considered? Is there any alternative therapeutic in case of recurrent bleeding despite TIPSS? What are the long-term outcomes on survival, liver transplantation, and hepatic encephalopathy after salvage TIPSS? Is this procedure futile in some patients? Is prognosis with salvage TIPSS nowadays as bad as earlier, despite the improvement of prophylaxis for variceal bleeding? The aim of this review is to summarize those data and to identify the lacking ones to guide further research on salvage TIPSS.

Endovascular Treatment for Variceal Hemorrhage: TIPS, BRTO, and Combined Approaches

Variceal hemorrhage is a feared complication of portal hypertension, with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Optimal management requires a thoughtful, multidisciplinary approach. In cases of refractory or recurrent esophageal hemorrhage, endovascular approaches such as transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) have a well-defined role. For hemorrhage related to gastric varices, the optimal treatment remains to be established; however, there is increasing adoption of balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO). This article will review the concept, history, patient selection, basic technique, and outcomes for TIPS, BRTO, and combined TIPS + BRTO procedures for variceal hemorrhage.

Retrograde-Antegrade Accelerated Trap Obliteration: A Modified Approach to Transvenous Eradication of Gastric Varices

This series presents a hybrid technique for obliteration of gastric varices (GVs) termed retrograde-antegrade accelerated trap obliteration that employs sclerosant agent instillation under concurrent inflow and outflow vessel occlusion with coils or plugs. Six patients (mean age, 56 y) with GVs were treated in 2014 and 2015. Technical success rate was 100%. Five patients completed 30-day follow-up. There were no procedure-related complications, and clinical success rate was 100%, with no bleeding recurrence over a mean follow-up of 298 days ± 178. GV obliteration rate was 100% (n = 4) at a mean of 157 days ± 158. This limited experience suggests that the described technique represents a viable approach to GV obliteration.