Elective Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation for Portal Decompression in the Immediate Pretransplantation Period in Adult Living Related Liver Transplant Recipient Candidates: Preliminary Results

Operative safety of orthotopic liver transplant in patients with prior transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts: A 20-year experience

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS

Orthotopic liver transplant (OLT) is the definitive treatment of most types of liver failure. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and portocaval shunt placement procedures reduce the systemic vascular complications of portal hypertension. TIPS placement remains a "bridge" therapy that enables treatment of refractory symptoms until transplantation becomes available. The aim of the present study was to describe the operative impact of TIPS prior to OLT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on patients that underwent liver transplant at the Hospital San José within the timeframe of 1999 and February 2020.

RESULTS

We reviewed a total of 92 patients with OLT. Sixty-six patients were male and 26 were female, with a mean age of 52 years. Nine (9.8%) of the 92 patients had a TIPS, before the OLT. Preoperative Child-Pugh class, MELD score, and sodium and platelet levels were similar between groups. We found no difference in the means of intensive care unit stay, operative time, or blood transfusions for liver transplant, with or without previous TIPS. There was no significant difference between groups regarding vascular and biliary complication rates or the need for early intervention. The overall one-year mortality rate in the TIPS group was 11%.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS is an appropriate therapeutic bridge towards liver transplant. We found no greater operative or postoperative complications in patients with TIPS before OLT, when compared with OLT patients without TIPS. The need for transfusion, operative time, and ICU stay were similar in both groups.

Intraoperative and postoperative impact of pretransplantation transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts in orthotopic liver transplantations: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) remains the definitive treatment for patients afflicted with end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) have been adapted as a bridge to transplantation, allowing partial normalization of portal pressure and associated symptom improvement. Conflicting evidence exists on TIPS' impact on operative procedures. This study aimed to analyze available evidence on patients who underwent OLT with prior TIPS compared to OLT alone with the intent to determine TIPS' impact on surgical outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted, identifying studies comparing TIPS + OLT versus OLT alone in patients with ESLD. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. Operative time, packed red blood cells transfusions, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, dialysis, serum creatinine levels, ascites, vascular complications, bleeding revisions, reintervention, and other complications rates were similar between both groups. Fresh frozen plasma transfusion -2.88 units (-5.42, -0.35; p= 0.03), was lower in the TIPS + OLT group.

CONCLUSION

Our study found TIPS can be safely employed without having detrimental impacts on OLT outcomes, furthermore, these findings also suggest TIPS does not increase bleeding or complications.

Evaluation and Management of Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cirrhotic patients have an increased risk of surgical complications and higher perioperative morbidity and mortality based on the severity of their liver disease. Liver disease predisposes patients to perioperative coagulopathies, volume overload, and encephalopathy. The goal of this paper is to discuss the surgical risk of cirrhotic patients undergoing elective surgeries and to discuss perioperative optimization strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Literature thus far varies by surgery type and the magnitude of surgical risk. CTP and MELD classification scores allow for the assessment of surgical risk in cirrhotic patients. Once the decision has been made to undergo elective surgery, cirrhotic patients can be optimized pre-procedure with the help of a checklist and by the involvement of a multidisciplinary team. Elective surgeries should be performed at hospital centers staffed by healthcare providers experienced in caring for cirrhotic patients. Further research is needed to develop ways to prepare this complicated patient population before elective surgery.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt as a bridge to liver transplant: Current state and future directions

Liver transplantation is one of the mainstays of treatment for liver failure due to severe chronic liver disease. Bridging therapies, such as placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), are frequently employed to control complications of portal hypertension such as ascites, hydrothorax, and variceal bleeding, and thereby reduce morbidity in patients awaiting transplant. There is no significant difference seen in either graft survival or patient survival between those receiving TIPS pre-transplant and those who do not, although those receiving TIPS placement on average have a longer waiting time on the transplant waitlist. Locoregional therapies, such as thermal ablation or chemoembolization, can be efficacious in patients with HCC and pre-existing TIPS; however there is a risk for increased adverse events in patients receiving these therapies who have TIPS compared to those who do not. In summary, TIPS is a safe, effective treatment that can be used to ameliorate the complications that are sequelae of portal hypertension. While it does not appear to improve survival post-transplant, TIPS placement pre-transplant may increase survival time to transplant, thus improving overall survival as well as quality of life.

Consensus conference on TIPS management: Techniques, indications, contraindications

The trans jugular intrahepatic Porto systemic shunt (TIPS) is no longer viewed as a salvage therapy or a bridge to liver transplantation and is currently indicated for a number of conditions related to portal hypertension with positive results in survival. Moreover, the availability of self-expandable polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered endoprostheses has dramatically improved the long-term patency of TIPS. However, since the last updated International guidelines have been published (year 2009) new evidence have come, which have open the field to new indications and solved areas of uncertainty. On this basis, the Italian Association of the Study of the Liver (AISF), the Italian College of Interventional Radiology-Italian Society of Medical Radiology (ICIR-SIRM), and the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Intensive Care (SIAARTI) promoted a Consensus Conference on TIPS. Under the auspices of the three scientific societies, the consensus process started with the review of the literature by a scientific board of experts and ended with a formal consensus meeting in Bergamo on June 4th and 5th, 2015. The final statements presented here were graded according to quality of evidence and strength of recommendations and were approved by an independent jury. By highlighting strengths and weaknesses of current indications to TIPS, the recommendations of AISF-ICIR-SIRM-SIAARTI may represent the starting point for further studies.

The history and future of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: food for thought

The origins of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) date back to the 1960s with inadvertent portal access during the early years of transjugular cholangiography. TIPS is now the most frequently performed portal hypertension decompressive procedure performed by interventional radiologists, and has become the primary portosystemic shunt (surgical or percutaneous) performed in the United States. One of the least discussed major advantages of TIPS in the transplant era is that it is intrahepatic and thus is removed in situ during a liver transplant, while extrahepatic shunts (surgical or percutaneous) have to be ligated or revised during the liver transplantation. However, since the widespread clinical utilization of TIPS in the 1990s, it has been plagued with two major problems, namely, patency and hepatic encephalopathy. With the advent of commercially available expanded polytetraflouroethylenne (e-PTFE) covered stents a decade ago, 12- to 24-month TIPS patency has improved significantly (by ∼20-30%). However, hepatic encephalopathy (although not proven to have increased due to e-PTFE covered stents grafts) remains a significant morbidity problem. The article discusses the history of TIPS, critiques the retrospective encephalopathy data in the literature, and discusses futuristic TIPS-design ideas about the management of post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt before and after Liver Transplantation

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has long been referred to as a procedure performed as "a bridge to transplantation" since, like many other portosystemic shunts, it decompresses the portal circulation and stabilizes patients but does not definitively treat portal hypertension. One of the major advantages of TIPS over surgically placed portosystemic shunts in the transplant era is that the TIPS is intrahepatic and is removed in situ with the native liver, and usually does not need additional surgery (unlike takedown/ligation of surgical shunts). There are several studies that evaluate TIPS before transplantation-not as a bridge/temporizing measure, but as a prelude to the transplant to decompress the portal circulation and reduce portosystemic engorgement and collaterals and thus, in theory, reduce intraoperative bleeding during liver transplantation. However, these studies, mostly in the transplant literature, have been equivocal from an intraoperative and posttransplant clinical outcome standpoint. TIPS creation in liver transplant recipients is another interesting aspect of TIPS. There has been a debate about whether or not liver transplantation adds additional technical difficulty to the TIPS procedure. Initially, many theories were proposed as to the technical difficulty of TIPS in a transplanted liver. However, recent opinions and published studies demonstrate that whole-graft liver transplantation does not pose a significant technical difficulty to TIPS. Moreover, there are several recent studies evaluating the outcomes of TIPS in liver transplant recipients, showing that outcomes are less favorable when compared with TIPS in nontransplanted patients. This article discusses the results of TIPS as a preoperative prelude to liver transplantation. In addition, it discusses the technical and clinical outcomes of TIPS in liver transplant recipients.

Stent-grafts for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation: specialized TIPS stent-graft versus generic stent-graft/bare stent combination

PURPOSE

To compare functional and anatomic outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs) created with the specialized Viatorr stent versus a Wallstent/Fluency stent combination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent TIPS creation with stent-grafts was conducted over a 54-month period ending in June 2008. Patients were divided into three groups: Viatorr only, Fluency only, and combined Viatorr/Fluency, the latter of which was included in the overall evaluation but excluded from the comparative analysis between the Viatorr and Fluency groups. Patient demographics, Child-Pugh scores, and portosystemic gradient (PSG) reduction were compared. Patencies were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 126 TIPSs created with stent-grafts were found: 28 with Fluency stents, 93 with Viatorr devices, and five combined. No significance in demographic factors or PSGs was found among groups (P > .05). Major encephalopathy rates were 3.6% and 4.3% in the Fluency and Viatorr groups, respectively (P = 1.000). Hemodynamic success rates were 93% and 98% in the Fluency and Viatorr groups, respectively (P = .099). The primary unassisted patency rates at 6, 9, and 12 months were 87%, 81%, and 81%, respectively, in the Fluency group and 95%, 93%, and 89%, respectively, in the Viatorr group (P = .03). Portal and hepatic end stenoses were the causes of TIPS narrowing in the Fluency and Viatorr groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Wallstent/Fluency stent combination is associated with a 1-year patency rate greater than 80%, with no significant difference versus the Viatorr stent regarding technical and hemodynamic success and encephalopathy rate. However, the Viatorr stent is associated with improved patency (89%) versus this bare stent/stent-graft combination.

Fifteen years' experience with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) using bare stents: retrospective review of clinical and technical aspects

PURPOSE

The authors present a retrospective analysis of a large series of patients who underwent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between March 1992 and December 2006, 658 patients were referred to our centre for TIPS placement. Indications for the procedure were digestive tract bleeding (52.8%), refractory ascites (35.3%), preservation of portal vein patency prior to liver transplantation (3.0%) and thrombosis of the suprahepatic veins (2.3%). Other indications (6.6%) included pleural ascites, portal thrombosis and hepatorenal and hepatopulmonary syndromes. All patients were evaluated with colour Doppler ultrasonography and in a few cases with computed tomography. The portal system was punctured under sonographic guidance. Wallstent, Palmaz and Nitinol thermosensitive stents were used. Embolisation of persistent varices was performed in 6.8% of cases.

RESULTS

Technical success was 98.9%. During a 1,500-day follow-up, the cumulative incidence of stent revision was 25.7% (Nitinol), 32.9% (Wallstent) and 1.8% (Palmaz). Mortality rates were 31.1%, 38.5% and 56.4%, respectively. The technical complications included six cases of heart failure, six of haematobilia, three of stent migration, two of intrahepatic haematoma and one of haemoperitoneum. Eight patients with severe portosystemic encephalopathy (PSE) were treated with a reduction stent.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS placement is safe and effective and may act as a bridge to liver transplantation. Ultrasonography plays a fundamental role in the preliminary assessment, in portal vein puncture and during the follow-up. Stent patency is satisfactory.