Identifying optimal candidates for early TIPS among patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding: a multicentre observational study

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and non-selective beta-blockers act as friends or foe in decompensated cirrhosis: A comparative review

The management of portal hypertension and its complications, such as variceal bleeding, in patients with cirrhosis often involves the use of nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) and a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Both treatment modalities have demonstrated efficacy; however, each presents distinct challenges and benefits. NSBBs, including propranolol, nadolol, and carvedilol, effectively reduce portal pressure, but are associated with side effects such as bradycardia, hypotension, fatigue, and respiratory issues. Additionally, NSBBs can exacerbate conditions such as refractory ascites, hepatorenal syndrome, and hepatic encephalopathy. In contrast, TIPS effectively reduces the incidence of variceal rebleeding, controlling refractory ascites. However, it is associated with a significant risk of hepatic encephalopathy, shunt dysfunction, and procedure-related complications including bleeding and infection. The high cost of TIPS, along with the need for regular follow-up and potential re-intervention, poses additional challenges. Furthermore, patient selection for TIPS is critical, as inappropriate candidates may experience suboptimal outcomes. Future studies comparing NSBBs and TIPS should focus on refining the patient selection criteria, enhancing procedural techniques, optimising combination therapies, and conducting long-term outcome studies. Personalised treatment approaches, cost-effectiveness analyses, and improved patient education and support are essential for maximising the use of these therapies.

A targeted endoscopic band ligation technique for management of acute esophageal variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) standard therapy is traditionally performed with banding from the distal esophagus upwards. However, esophageal varices (EV) with stigma of recent bleeding are not consistently banded at the first attempt. We aimed to compare conventional banding in acute variceal bleeding (AVB) vs targeted banding of EV in patients with stigma of recent bleeding (white nipple sign).

METHODS

This case-control study included patients treated in our hospital from December 2016 to September 2019 with endoscopic signs of recent variceal bleeding. The targeted technique involves deploying the first band at the recent bleeding stigmata and then completing the procedure with standard variceal banding technique. The conventional group included patients treated with standard EBL.

RESULTS

We analyzed 92 patients, 54 (58.7%) in conventional technique and 38 (41.3%) in the targeted group. Active bleeding during endoscopy occurred in 11 (20.0%) of conventional and two (6.5%) of the targeted group (p=0.021). Although procedure time was longer in the conventional group (24.3min SD 11.58) compared to the targeted group (21.52min SD 8.73) this difference was not significant. One detached band episode was documented in targeted group and none in the conventional group (p=0.418). TIPS were not used during this study due to health system policy. There were no significant differences in mortality, rebleeding or transfusion requirements between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The targeted technique for EV with stigma of recent bleeding had a low band detachment incidence and fewer bleeding events during endoscopy, however, the limitations of the study should be considered.

Early Dynamics of Portal Pressure Gradient After TIPS Insertion Predict Mortality

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement leads to a reduction in portal pressure and an improvement in survival in patients with recurrent and refractory ascites and variceal haemorrhage. Prediction of post-TIPS survival is primarily determined by factors identified before the TIPS procedure, as data collected during or after TIPS implantation are limited. The aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of early hemodynamic changes after TIPS placement on survival, in order to refine post TIPS management.

METHODS

In this prospective bicentric study, consecutive patients (n = 105) undergoing TIPS placement for ascites or variceal haemorrhage underwent measurement of portal pressure gradient (PPG) immediately at TIPS insertion (PPG0) and 24 h later (PPG24h) and the ΔPPG was calculated from PPG24h and PPG0 (ΔPPG = PPG24h-PPG0). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and uni- and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to identify survival predictors.

RESULTS

Patients with lack of increased ΔPPG exhibited poorer 90-day and 1-year survival compared to patients with increased ΔPPG. This worse survival was independent of The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, Child-Pugh score, bilirubin levels, creatinine and the Freiburg index of post-TIPS survival (FIPS) > 0.92. Among these patients with poorer outcome, elevated bilirubin (> 25 μmol/L) further distinguished survivors from non-survivors.

CONCLUSION

Lack of increased ΔPPG post-TIPS insertion identifies a high-risk patient group with worse survival. We propose incorporating this second PPG measurement and determining ΔPPG into clinical practice to identify these patients early and tailor post-TIPS patient care.

The clinical relevance of acute-on-chronic liver failure in medical procedures: Endoscopy, interventions and surgery

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a specific, but complex and multifactorial form of acute decompensation (AD) of cirrhosis and is characterized by an extraordinary dynamic natural course, rapidly evolving organ failure and high short-term mortality. In daily clinical practice, patients with liver cirrhosis and decompensation have indications for different medical procedures such as endoscopies, interventional treatments like transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) or even surgical procedures. In these situations, clinicians often need to balance the expected benefits of such procedures with the risks of causing acute decompensation or ACLF. This review summarizes the evidence of medical procedures and their role in precipitating or preventing ACLF and highlights the aspects to consider during patient selection.

TIPS and hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis

Despite a better understanding in its prognosis and pathogenesis, hepatic encephalopathy (HE) remains one of the major complications of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) with a prevalence ranging from 35 to 50%. Its epidemiology differs according to the indication for TIPS (salvage/rescue TIPS, preemptive (pTIPS) or elective TIPS). In salvage/rescue TIPS, the prognosis is linked to that of bleeding, and HE should not be a contraindication to TIPS, especially as bleeding is a common precipitating factor of HE. In pTIPS, i.e. TIPS performed within the 72 h after stabilization of acute variceal bleeding in high-risk patients, the risk rebleeding and HE is reduced, when compared to endoscopic and drugs treatment. As a consequence, the Baveno VII recommendations state that HE at admission should not be considered as a contraindication to pTIPS placement. In elective situations, such as refractory (intractable ascites (intolerance to diuretics) or resistant ascites (i.e. despite optimal diuretic treatment (spironolactone 400 mg/d and Furosemide 160 mg/d combined with low-salt treatment (< 5.2 g/day) or recurrent ascites (the need for at least 3 paracenteses per year) and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, it is recommended to systematically look for risk factors for HE, and chronic or refractory HE remain not recommended to TIPS in most centers. Chronic HE involves persistent neurological symptoms with fluctuating acute episodes. Recurrent HE refers to repeated episodes occurring within 6 months, while refractory HE is resistant to standard treatments, often requiring more aggressive management (Vilstrup et al. 2014). A careful selection of patients is mandatory before elective TIPS decision. Risk factors must be identified and corrected if possible before any TIPS decision is made. Management of HE after TIPS is based on identification of precipitating factors, curative treatment with lactulose as first-line therapy and rifaximin as second-line therapy, and nutritional management. In elective TIPS, prophylactic administration of rifaximin is recommended in order to decrease the risk of further HE development in selected patients (not in everyone, at least according to Baveno VII). Liver transplantation (LT) should be discussed with a multidisciplinary team as an alternative option to TIPS in case of high-risk of post-TIPS HE, and in case of refractory HE after TIPS.

The evolution of the TIPS placement technique and its applications over four decades

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), a highly effective procedure reducing portal hypertension, has been in use for over seven decades and is now a cornerstone in managing portal hypertension-related complications such as variceal bleeding and ascites. Historically, TIPS has dealt with two main challenges: ensuring stent patency and preventing post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy. The introduction of PTFE-coated stents markedly reduced the risk of TIPS dysfunction and stent patency is no longer a major concern. However, despite improved patient selection criteria, hepatic encephalopathy continues to be a significant and persistent issue. In addition, the broader application of TIPS in recent decades has brought to light additional, albeit less common, complications, such as post-TIPS heart failure. This review offers a comprehensive overview of TIPS historical evolution, advancements in technique, and its application in the treatment of portal hypertension.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt: An Update

It is more than 50 years since the concept of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) was first introduced as a percutaneous procedure for patients with refractory variceal bleeding and ascites. TIPS has become widely accepted in the management of complications of portal hypertension because it is less invasive than surgery. In the early days of TIPS, complications included the poor long-term patency of the stent and a high incidence of hepatic encephalopathy. In addition, an excessive shunt diameter after TIPS often resulted in severe hepatic encephalopathy. Although recent covered stents have significantly reduced shunt dysfunction, the development of hepatic encephalopathy and early liver failure remain to be crucial post-TIPS complications. This study reviews the current literature on the status of TIPS in the treatment of cirrhosis.

Comparison of outcomes for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation: Viatorr versus Fluency versus a bare stent/Fluency stent combination

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) created with the single covered-uncovered stent (Viatorr TIPS Endoprosthesis) versus covered stent (Fluency) versus a combination of covered and uncovered stent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From May 2016 and July 2019, a total of 180 liver cirrhosis patients with recurrent variceal bleeding underwent TIPS creation with single covered-uncovered stent (n = 63) or covered stent (n = 41) or a covered and uncovered stent combination (n = 76). Shunt dysfunction, rebleeding, overt hepatic encephalopathy and mortality was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test.

RESULTS

The difference of baseline characteristics among these three groups were not significant. The included patients had a median age of 51 years (IQR 43-61), and 101 (56.1%) were men. The 1-year and 2-year shunt dysfunction rates were 1.6% and 3.2% in the single covered-uncovered stent group, 7.3% and 7.3% in the covered stent group and 5.3% and 6.6% in the combination group, respectively. There was no significant difference among groups [Hazard Ratio (HR) (95%CI): 1 vs 2.29 (0.38 - 13.72) vs 2.10 (0.41 - 10.83); P = 0.913]. No significant differences in the incidence of all-cause rebleeding were observed between the groups at 1 year (Viatorr vs Fluency vs combination: 11.1% vs 17.1% vs 10.5%) as well as 2 years (15.9% vs 17.1% vs 11.8%), with the HR (95%CI) being 1 vs 1.27 (0.5-3.21) vs 0.74 (0.30-1.82); P = 0.475). The 1-year and 2-year incidence of overt hepatic encephalopathy were 30.2% and 30.2% in the single covered-uncovered stent group, 22.0% and 22.0% in the covered stent group and 25.0% and 25.0% in the combination group, respectively. However, there was no significant difference among these three groups (P = 0.402). In addition, there was no significant difference in the 1-year and 2-year mortality (6.3% and 7.9% vs. 4.9% and 9.8% vs. 6.6% and 9.2%, P = 0.606).

CONCLUSION

No significant difference was observed among different stent groups. Fluency covered stent and the generic bare stent/Fluency covered stent was not an unreasonable alternative to the Viatorr stent for TIPS creation.

Prophylactic endotracheal intubation before endoscopic surgery reduces the rebleeding rate in acute esophagogastric variceal bleeding patients

Objectives

Esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EVB) is one of the main causes of cirrhosis-related deaths, and endoscopic therapy is the first-line treatment of choice. However, the efficacy of prophylactic endotracheal intubation (PEI) before endoscopy remains controversial.

Methods

Data were collected from 119 patients who underwent endoscopic confirmation of an EVB. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was applied to reduce bias between the two groups. The primary outcomes included rebleeding rates within 24 h and 6 weeks post-endoscopic surgery and 6-week mortality.

Results

After endoscopic surgery, the rebleeding rate within 24 h in the PEI group was significantly lower than non-PEI group (1.2 % VS 12.6 %, P-value = 0.025). Although PEI did not reduce 6-week mortality, it significantly reduced the risk of rebleeding within 24 h (odds ratio [OR]: 0.89, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-0.97, P = 0.008) and within 6 weeks (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.36, 95%CI: 0.14-0.90, P = 0.029). In multivariate regression analyses, maximum varices diameter >1.5 cm (OR: 1.23, 95 % CI: 1.09-1.37, P < 0.001) was independent risk factor for rebleeding within 24 h. Creatinine (HR: 1.01, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.02, P < 0.001) and international normalized ratio (HR: 2.99, 95 % CI: 1.99-4.65, P < 0.001) were independent risk factors for rebleeding within 6 weeks.

Conclusions

PEI before endoscopic surgery reduced the incidence of rebleeding within 24 h and 6 weeks after endoscopic surgery. However, PEI did not reduce the 6-week mortality rate after endoscopic surgery and might increase the length of hospital stay.

French guidelines on TIPS: Indications and modalities

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has become essential in the treatment or prevention of portal hypertension-related complications. In the early 1990s, the primary indication was refractory bleeding. It is now proposed for the treatment of ascites for the prevention of bleeding and in patients with vascular diseases of the liver. Thus, there are a growing number of patients being treated with TIPS all over the world. The broadening of indications, the involvement of multiple stakeholders, the need for an accurate selection, the positioning in relation to transplantation and the lack of standardization in pre-therapeutic assessment, in the procedure itself and in the follow-up have led the board of the French Association for the Study of the Liver to establish recommendations.

Nationwide survey analysis of esophagogastric varices in portal hypertension based on endoscopic management in China

Aims

The endoscopic treatment of esophagogastric varices is challenging, and the nationwide application of endoscopic therapies for various types of esophagogastric varices and different clinical scenarios remains unclear. This study investigated the use of endoscopic therapy for portal hypertension in China.

Methods

This study used a questionnaire survey initiated by the Liver Health Consortium in China to investigate the use of endoscopic therapies for portal hypertension. Questionnaires were released online from January 30, 2023 to February 28, 2023 and filled out by chief physicians or senior instructors responsible for endoscopic therapies in participating hospitals across 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) in China. Comparisons of guideline adherence between primary and referral medical centers were performed using the chi‐square test or Fisher's exact test.

Results

In total, 836 hospitals participated in the survey. For primary and secondary prophylaxis of esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EGVB), adherence to the national guidelines was 72.5% (606/836) and 39.2% (328/836), respectively. Significant differences were observed in the rate of adherence between the primary and referral centers for primary (79.9% [111/139] vs. 71.0% [495/697], p = 0.033) and secondary prophylaxis (27.3% [38/139] vs. 41.6% [290/697], p = 0.002). Of the hospitals, 78.2% (654/836) preferred endoscopic therapies for acute EGVB, and the timing of endoscopy was usually within 12 h (48.5%, 317/654) and 12–24 h (36.9%, 241/654) after bleeding. Endoscopic therapy was more likely to be the first choice of treatment for acute EGVB in referral centers than in primary centers (82.6% [576/697] vs. 56.1% [78/139], p < 0.001). Regarding the management of gastroesophageal varices type 2 and isolated gastric varices type 1, the most prevalent procedures were cyanoacrylate injection combined with sclerotherapy (48.2% [403/836] and 29.9% [250/836], respectively); however, substantial hospitals preferred clip‐assisted therapies (12.4% [104/836] and 26.4% [221/836], respectively). Nonselective beta‐blockers were routinely used in 73.4% (614/836) of hospitals during the perioperative period of EGVB management, and propranolol (88.8%, 545/614) and carvedilol (37.5%, 230/614) were the most widely used nonselective beta‐blockers.

Conclusions

This survey clarified that various endoscopic procedures have been implemented nationwide in China. Participating hospitals have actively performed emergent endoscopy for acute EGVB; however, these hospitals do not adequately follow recommendations regarding primary and secondary prophylaxis of EGVB. In the future, standardizing the selection of endoscopic procedures and improving compliance with guidelines is crucial.

Study protocol for a Randomised controlled trial of EArly transjugular intrahepatiC porTosystemic stent-shunt in Acute Variceal Bleeding (REACT-AVB trial)

INTRODUCTION

In liver cirrhosis, acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is associated with a 1-year mortality rate of up to 40%. Data on early or pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunt (TIPSS) in AVB is inconclusive and may not reflect current management strategies. Randomised controlled trial of EArly transjugular intrahepatiC porTosystemic stent-shunt in AVB (REACT-AVB) aims to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of early TIPSS in patients with cirrhosis and AVB after initial bleeding control.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

REACT-AVB is a multicentre, randomised controlled, open-label, superiority, two-arm, parallel-group trial with an internal pilot. The two interventions allocated randomly 1:1 are early TIPSS within 4 days of diagnostic endoscopy or secondary prophylaxis with endoscopic therapy in combination with non-selective beta blockers. Patients aged ≥18 years with cirrhosis and Child-Pugh Score 7-13 presenting with AVB with endoscopic haemostasis are eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome is transplant-free survival at 1 year post randomisation. Secondary endpoints include transplant-free survival at 6 weeks, rebleeding, serious adverse events, other complications of cirrhosis, Child-Pugh and Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores at 6 and 12 months, health-related quality of life, use of healthcare resources, cost-effectiveness and use of cross-over therapies. The sample size is 294 patients over a 4-year recruitment period, across 30 hospitals in the UK.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research ethics committee of National Health Service has approved REACT-AVB (reference number: 23/WM/0085). The results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. A lay summary will also be emailed or posted to participants before publication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN85274829; protocol version 3.0, 1 July 2023.

The Prediction and Treatment of Bleeding Esophageal Varices in the Artificial Intelligence Era: A Review

Esophageal varices (EVs), a significant complication of cirrhosis, present a considerable challenge in clinical practice due to their high risk of bleeding and associated morbidity and mortality. This manuscript explores the transformative role of artificial intelligence (AI) in the management of EV, particularly in enhancing diagnostic accuracy and predicting bleeding risks. It underscores the potential of AI in offering noninvasive, efficient alternatives to traditional diagnostic methods such as esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The complexity of EV management is highlighted, necessitating a multidisciplinary approach that includes pharmacological therapy, endoscopic interventions, and, in some cases, surgical options tailored to individual patient profiles. Additionally, the paper emphasizes the importance of integrating AI into medical education and practice, preparing healthcare professionals for the evolving landscape of medical technology. It projects a future where AI significantly influences the management of gastrointestinal bleeding, improving clinical decision-making, patient outcomes, and overall healthcare efficiency. The study advocates for a patient-centered approach in healthcare, balancing the incorporation of innovative technologies with ethical principles and the diverse needs of patients to optimize treatment efficacy and enhance healthcare accessibility.

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

A modified model for predicting mortality after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: A multicentre study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt has controversial survival benefits; thus, patient screening should be performed preoperatively. In this study, we aimed to develop a model to predict post-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt mortality to aid clinical decision making.

METHODS

A total of 811 patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt from five hospitals were divided into the training and external validation data sets. A modified prediction model of post-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt mortality (ModelMT ) was built after performing logistic regression. To verify the improved performance of ModelMT , we compared it with seven previous models, both in discrimination and calibration. Furthermore, patients were stratified into low-, medium-, high- and extremely high-risk subgroups.

RESULTS

ModelMT demonstrated a satisfying predictive efficiency in both discrimination and calibration, with an area under the curve of .875 in the training set and .852 in the validation set. Compared to previous models (ALBI, BILI-PLT, MELD-Na, MOTS, FIPS, MELD, CLIF-C AD), ModelMT showed superior performance in discrimination by statistical difference in the Delong test, net reclassification improvement and integrated discrimination improvement (all p < .050). Similar results were observed in calibration. Low-, medium-, high- and extremely high-risk groups were defined by scores of ≤160, 160-180, 180-200 and >200, respectively. To facilitate future clinical application, we also built an applet for ModelMT .

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully developed a predictive model with improved performance to assist in decision making for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt according to survival benefits.

Portal hypertension and variceal bleeding in patients with liver cancer: Evidence gaps for prevention and management

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Portal hypertension (PHT) and HCC are 2 major complications of cirrhosis that often coexist in the same patient and impact the prognosis, especially in patients with acute variceal bleeding. In this review, we aim to discuss the best strategy for PHT screening and primary prophylaxis, as well as the management of acute variceal bleeding, to improve the management of PHT in HCC patients.

RESULTS

Recent therapeutic advances observed in the management of HCC, notably through the advent of immunotherapy, have led to a clear improvement in the survival of patients. The prevention of complications related to underlying cirrhosis, such as PHT and acute variceal bleeding, is now part of the management of HCC patients. The Baveno VII conference recently redefined screening and prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis. However, data regarding the applicability of these criteria in patients with HCC have been sparse. From our point of view, the Baveno criteria are not appropriate to exclude high-risk esophageal varices (EV) in HCC patients, and endoscopy should be performed except in HCC patients with a liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≥25 kPa, who should benefit from nonselective beta-blockers (NSSBs) without performing endoscopy. We are also in favor of using NSBBs as primary prophylaxis in patients with EV regardless of the size and with gastric varices since these patients display clinically significant PHT.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate evaluation and treatment of PHT remain major issues in improving the outcomes of HCC patients. Many questions remain unanswered, opening the field to many areas of research.

Development and validation of a prognostic score to identify the optimal candidate for preemptive TIPS in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Baveno VII workshop recommends the use of preemptive TIPS (p-TIPS) in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding (AVB) at high- risk of treatment failure. However, the criteria defining "high-risk" have low clinical accessibility or include subjective variables. We aimed to develop and externally validate a model for better identification of p-TIPS candidates.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

The derivation cohort included 1554 patients with cirrhosis and AVB who were treated with endoscopy plus drug (n = 1264) or p-TIPS (n = 290) from 12 hospitals in China between 2010 and 2017. We first used competing risk regression to develop a score for predicting 6-week and 1-year mortality in patients treated with endoscopy plus drugs, which included age, albumin, bilirubin, international normalized ratio, white blood cell, creatinine, and sodium. The score was internally validated with the bootstrap method, which showed good discrimination (6 wk/1 y concordance-index: 0.766/0.740) and calibration, and outperformed other currently available models. In the second stage, the developed score was combined with treatment and their interaction term to predicate the treatment effect of p-TIPS (mortality risk difference between treatment groups) in the whole derivation cohort. The estimated treatment effect of p-TIPS varied substantially among patients. The prediction model had good discriminative ability (6 wk/1 y c -for-benefit: 0.696/0.665) and was well calibrated. These results were confirmed in the validation dataset of 445 patients with cirrhosis with AVB from 6 hospitals in China between 2017 and 2019 (6-wk/1-y c-for-benefit: 0.675/0.672).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed and validated a clinical prediction model that can help to identify individuals who will benefit from p-TIPS, which may guide clinical decision-making.

Risks and benefits of TIPS in HCC and other liver malignancies: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a well-validated treatment option for clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) in the context of liver cirrhosis. Its high efficacy and safety in the management of treatment-refractory ascites and variceal bleeding have been extensively proven. Contraindications for TIPS include severe right heart failure, hepatic encephalopathy, and sepsis. However, the role of liver malignancy in TIPS is debatable. Mostly, primary liver malignancies such as hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) emerge from advanced liver diseases. Coexisting portal hypertension in HCC often results in limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. Previous studies have shown that TIPS implantation in patients with HCC is technically feasible and is usually not associated with major adverse events. Furthermore, TIPS may help in bridging the time to liver transplantation in early HCC and allow for locoregional treatment in advanced HCC. However, several studies suggest that seeding tumour cells to the lungs by TIPS placement might worsen the prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS placement in patients with coexisting liver malignancy remains a case-by-case decision, and there is no profound evidence allowing general recommendations. This review aims to provide a state-of-the-art overview of the potential risks and benefits of TIPS placement in patients with liver malignancies.

Association of nonmalignant portal vein thrombosis and clinical outcomes in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding: a multicenter observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Baveno VII workshop recommends management of acute variceal bleeding (AVB) in cirrhotic patients with nonmalignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) should be performed according to the guidelines for patients without PVT. Nevertheless, whether PVT affects the outcome of patients with cirrhosis and AVB remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical impact of PVT on the outcomes in the pre-emptive TIPSS eligible patients with cirrhosis and AVB.

METHODS

From December 2010 to June 2016, 1219 consecutive cirrhotic patients admitted due to AVB with (n = 151; 12.4%) or without PVT (n = 1068; 87.6%), who received drug plus endoscopic treatment (a combination of vasoactive drugs, antibiotics, and endoscopic ligation for AVB, followed by beta-blockers plus variceal ligation for prevention of rebleeding) were retrospectively included. Fine and Gray competing risk regression models were taken to evaluate the impact of PVT on clinical outcomes after adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

During follow-up, 211 patients (17.3%) died, 490 (40.2%) experienced further bleeding, and 78 (6.4%) experienced new or worsening ascites within 1 year. Compared with those without PVT, patients with PVT had a similar risk of mortality (PVT vs no-PVT: 19.9% vs 16.7% at 1 year; adjusted HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.51-1.52, p = 0.653), further bleeding (47.0% vs 39.2% at 1 year, adjusted HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.92-1.53, p = 183), and new or worsening ascites (7.9% vs 9.6%, adjusted HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.39-1.28, p = 0.253) after adjusting for confounders in multivariable models. These findings were consistent across different relevant subgroups and confirmed by propensity score matching analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed no evidence that the PVT was associated with an improved or worsened outcome among cirrhotic patients with AVB who received standard treatment.

TIPS prevents further decompensation and improves survival in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension in an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Further decompensation represents a prognostic stage of cirrhosis associated with higher mortality compared with first decompensation. A transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is indicated to prevent variceal rebleeding and for refractory ascites, but its overall efficacy to prevent further decompensations is unknown. This study assessed the incidence of further decompensation and mortality after TIPS vs. standard of care (SOC).

METHODS

Controlled studies assessing covered TIPS compared with SOC for the indication of refractory ascites and prevention of variceal rebleeding published from 2004 to 2020 were considered. We collected individual patient data (IPD) to perform an IPD meta-analysis and to compare the treatment effect in a propensity score (PS)-matched population. Primary outcome was the incidence of further decompensation and the secondary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

In total, 3,949 individual patient data sets were extracted from 12 controlled studies and, after PS matching, 2,338 patients with similar characteristics (SOC = 1,749; TIPS = 589) were analysed. The 2-year cumulative incidence function of further decompensation in the PS-matched population was 0.48 (95% CI 0.43-0.52) in the TIPS group vs. 0.63 (95% CI 0.61-0.65) in the SOC group (stratified Gray's test, p <0.0001), considering mortality and liver transplantation as competing events. The lower further decompensation rate with TIPS was confirmed by adjusted IPD meta-analysis (hazard ratio 0.44; 95% CI 0.37-0.54) and was consistent across TIPS indication subgroups. The 2-year cumulative survival probability was higher with TIPS than with SOC (0.71 vs. 0.63; p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of TIPS for refractory ascites and for prevention of variceal rebleeding reduces the incidence of a further decompensation event compared with SOC and increases survival in highly selected patients.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

A further decompensation (new or worsening ascites, variceal bleeding or rebleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, jaundice, hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis) in patients with cirrhosis is associated with a poor prognosis. Besides the known role of TIPS in portal hypertension-related complications, this study shows that TIPS is also able to decrease the overall risk of a further decompensation and increase survival compared with standard of care. These results further support the role of TIPS in the management of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension-related complications.

Prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy during the perioperative period of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an established procedure for treating the complications of portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis. While the pathogenesis of postoperative TIPS-related hepatic encephalopathy (HE) has yet to be fully understood, intraoperative portosystemic shunts may provide a pathological basis for the occurrence of postoperative HE in patients with liver cirrhosis. Studies at home and abroad have expressed mixed opinions about TIPS-related HE. This study presents a literature review on the risk factors for and prevention and treatment of perioperative TIPS-related HE in patients with liver cirrhosis, aiming to optimize the procedure and reduce the incidence of postoperative HE.

EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on acute-on-chronic liver failure

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), which was described relatively recently (2013), is a severe form of acutely decompensated cirrhosis characterised by the existence of organ system failure(s) and a high risk of short-term mortality. ACLF is caused by an excessive systemic inflammatory response triggered by precipitants that are clinically apparent (e.g., proven microbial infection with sepsis, severe alcohol-related hepatitis) or not. Since the description of ACLF, some important studies have suggested that patients with ACLF may benefit from liver transplantation and because of this, should be urgently stabilised for transplantation by receiving appropriate treatment of identified precipitants, and full general management, including support of organ systems in the intensive care unit (ICU). The objective of the present Clinical Practice Guidelines is to provide recommendations to help clinicians recognise ACLF, make triage decisions (ICU vs. no ICU), identify and manage acute precipitants, identify organ systems that require support or replacement, define potential criteria for futility of intensive care, and identify potential indications for liver transplantation. Based on an in-depth review of the relevant literature, we provide recommendations to navigate clinical dilemmas followed by supporting text. The recommendations are graded according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine system and categorised as 'weak' or 'strong'. We aim to provide the best available evidence to aid the clinical decision-making process in the management of patients with ACLF.

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.

To TIPS or Not to TIPS in High Risk of Variceal Rebleeding and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

Variceal bleeding is a consequence of severe portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis. Although the rate of bleeding has decreased over time, variceal bleeding in the presence of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) carries a high risk of treatment failure and short-term mortality. Treatment and/or removal of precipitating events (mainly bacterial infection and alcoholic hepatitis) and decrease of portal pressure may improve outcome of patients with acute decompensation or ACLF. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs), especially in the preemptive situation, have been found to efficiently control bleeding, prevent rebleeding, and reduce short-term mortality. Therefore, TIPS placement should be considered as an option in the management of ACLF patients with variceal bleeding.

Hepatic encephalopathy is not a contraindication to pre-emptive TIPS in high-risk patients with cirrhosis with variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

A pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (pTIPS) reduces mortality in high-risk patients with cirrhosis (Child-Pugh C/B+active bleeding) with acute variceal bleeding (AVB). Real-life studies point out that <15% of patients eligible for pTIPS ultimately undergo transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) due to concerns about hepatic encephalopathy (HE). The outcome of patients undergoing pTIPS with HE is unknown. We aimed to (1) assess the prevalence of HE in patients with AVB; (2) evaluate the outcome of patients presenting HE at admission after pTIPS; and (3) determine if HE at admission is a risk factor for death and post-TIPS HE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is an observational study including 2138 patients from 34 centres between October 2011 and May 2015. Placement of pTIPS was based on individual centre policy. Patients were followed up to 1 year, death or liver transplantation.

RESULTS

671 of 2138 patients were considered at high risk, 66 received pTIPS and 605 endoscopic+drug treatment. At admission, HE was significantly more frequent in high-risk than in low-risk patients (39.2% vs 10.6%, p<0.001). In high-risk patients with HE at admission, pTIPS was associated with a lower 1-year mortality than endoscopic+drug (HR 0.374, 95% CI 0.166 to 0.845, p=0.0181). The incidence of HE was not different between patients treated with pTIPS and endoscopic+drug (38.2% vs 38.7%, p=0.9721), even in patients with HE at admission (56.4% vs 58.7%, p=0.4594). Age >56, shock, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score >15, endoscopic+drug treatment and HE at admission were independent factors of death in high-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

pTIPS is associated with better survival than endoscopic treatment in high-risk patients with cirrhosis with variceal bleeding displaying HE at admission.

Use of Balloon Occluded Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration (BRTO) for Treatment of Gastric Varices: A Narrative Review

Gastric Varices occur as a result of portal hypertension. Balloon Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration (BRTO) is a modality for managing gastric varices. The ultimate goal of this review is to promote the broader adoption of BRTO in managing gastric varices and to promote further research to improve patient outcomes. Before this study, an electronic literature search was undertaken based on identified concepts, keywords, and other pertinent descriptions. Search databases were developed and included "Gastric varices" AND "BRTO" OR "intervention" OR "treatment" OR "procedure" OR "glue" OR "adhesive".  The databases selected and thoroughly searched were PubMed, Cochrane Library and ScienceDirect. Following the first search, 274 articles were found in total. By applying inclusion criteria of full-text articles and a period of fewer than five years, the database was reduced to 37 articles, which was then further filtered to include only articles on adults over 19 years old, leaving a total count of 17 articles. BRTO is a relatively simple procedure to perform once the essential skill is attained and helpful in both emergency and elective management of gastric varices. Its use still needs to be improved by the unavailability and lack of skills. However, there are side effects associated with BRTO as it causes elevation of portal hypertension, recurrent bleeding, hemoglobinuria and pain post procedure. This review emphasizes the need for further research in this field, focusing on refining patient selection criteria, improving the technical aspect of the procedure and enhancing long-term outcomes.

Diagnosis and Management of Esophagogastric Varices

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is a potentially fatal complication of clinically significant portal hypertension and is one of the most common causes of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Thus, esophagogastric varices represent a major economic and population health issue. Patients with advanced chronic liver disease typically undergo an upper endoscopy to screen for esophagogastric varices. However, upper endoscopy is not recommended for patients with liver stiffness < 20 KPa and platelet count > 150 × 10⁹/L as there is a low probability of high-risk varices. Patients with high-risk varices should receive primary prophylaxis with either nonselective beta-blockers or endoscopic band ligation. In cases of AVB, patients should receive upper endoscopy within 12 h after resuscitation and hemodynamic stability, whereas endoscopy should be performed as soon as possible if patients are unstable. In cases of suspected variceal bleeding, starting vasoactive therapy as soon as possible in combination with endoscopic treatment is recommended. On the other hand, in cases of uncontrolled bleeding, balloon tamponade or self-expandable metal stents can be used as a bridge to more definitive therapy such as transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. This article aims to offer a comprehensive review of recommendations from international guidelines as well as recent updates on the management of esophagogastric varices.

Percutaneous radiological interventions of the portal vein: a comprehensive review

The portal vein is the largest vessel supplying the liver. A number of radiological interventions are performed through the portal vein, namely for primary pathologies of the portal vein, for inducing liver hypertrophy or to treat the sequelae of portal hypertension among others. The routes used include direct transhepatic, transjugular, and, uncommonly, trans-splenic and through subcutaneous varices. Portal vein embolization and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are among the most common portal vein interventions that are performed to induce hypertrophy of the future liver remnant and to treat complications of portal hypertension, respectively. Other interventions include transhepatic obliteration of varices and shunts, portal vein thrombolysis, portal vein recanalization, pancreatic islet cell transplantation, and embolization of portal vein injuries. We present a detailed illustrative review of the various radiological portal vein interventions.

Expert consensus on emergency procedures for portal hypertension bleeding (2022)

Expert consensus proposes an emergency treatment protocol for portal hypertension bleeding. Herein, the emergency treatment procedures, which include first aid, medical, interventional, and surgical treatments, are described. In addition, the indications, contraindications, operating norms, precautions, and prevention of complications of portal hypertension are described to optimize the first aid process.

Left gastric vein embolization during TIPS placement for acute variceal bleeding has no effect on bleeding recurrence: Results of a multicenter study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether concomitant left gastric vein embolization (LGVE) during transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for acute variceal hemorrhage could reduce the risk of bleeding recurrence.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A national multicenter observational study was conducted in 14 centers between January 2019 and December 2020. All cirrhotic patients who underwent TIPS placement for acute variceal bleeding were included. During TIPS procedure, size of left gastric vein (LGV), performance of LGVE, material used for LGVE and portosystemic pressure gradient (PPG) before and after TIPS placement were collected. A propensity score for the occurrence of LGVE was calculated to assess effect of LGVE on rebleeding recurrence at six weeks and one year.

RESULTS

A total of 356 patients were included (mean age 57.3 ± 10.8 [standard deviation] years; 283/356 [79%] men). Median follow-up was 11.2 months [interquartile range: 1.2, 13.3]. The main indication for TIPS was pre-emptive TIPS (162/356; 46%), rebleeding despite secondary prophylaxis (105/356; 29%), and salvage TIPS (89/356; 25%). Overall, 128/356 (36%) patients underwent LGVE during TIPS procedure. At six weeks and one year, rebleeding-free survival did not differ significantly between patients who underwent LGVE and those who did not (6/128 [5%] vs. 15/228 [7%] at six weeks, and 11/128 [5%] vs. 22/228 [7%] at one year, P = 0.622 and P = 0.889 respectively). A total of 55 pairs of patients were retained after propensity score matching. In patients without LGVE, the rebleeding rate was not different from those with LGVE (3/55 [5%] vs. 4/55 [7%], P > 0.99, and 5/55 [9%] vs. 6/55[11%], P > 0.99, at six weeks and one year respectively). Multivariable analysis identified PPG after TIPS placement as the only predictor of bleeding recurrence (hazard ratio = 1.09; 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.18; P = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter national real-life study, we did not observe any benefit of concomitant LGVE during TIPS placement for acute variceal bleeding on bleeding recurrence rate.

A novel prognostic model for predicting the risk of first variceal hemorrhage in patients with HBV-related cirrhosis

Background

Variceal hemorrhage (VH) is a life-threatening complication of cirrhosis. An accurate VH risk evaluation is critical to determine appropriate prevention strategies. We aimed to develop an individualized prediction model to predict the risk of first VH in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related cirrhotic patients.

Methods

A nomogram was developed based on a retrospective analysis of 527 consecutive HBV-related cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices (GEVs). The nomogram evaluation was performed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), concordance index (C-index), calibration plot, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The results were verified using an external cohort (n = 187).

Results

We developed a nomogram based on clinical and endoscopic features, including the size of varices, red wale marks, ascites, spleen thickness, γ-glutamyltransferase, and hematocrit. The C-index of the nomogram in the derivation and validation cohort was 0.806 and 0.820, respectively, and the calibration plot fitted well. Compared with those of the North Italian Endoscopic Club (NIEC) and revised NIEC indexes, the AUC (derivation cohort: 0.822 vs. 0.653 vs. 0.713; validation cohort: 0.846 vs. 0.685 vs. 0.747) and DCA curves of this nomogram were better. Further, based on the risk scores, patients were classified into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, and significant differences were noted in VH incidence among the three risk groups (P <0.001 for each cohort).

Conclusions

An effective individualized nomogram to predict the risk of first VH in HBV-related GEV patients was established, which can assist clinicians in developing more appropriate prevention strategies.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension: 30 years experience from China

Liver diseases are a major cause of illness and death worldwide. In China, liver diseases, primarily viral hepatitis, affect approximately 300 million people, thus having a major impact on the global burden of liver diseases. Portal hypertension is the most severe complication of chronic liver diseases, including ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and bleeding from gastroesophageal varices. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) represents a very effective treatment of these complications. Since its introduction 30 years ago in China, the use of TIPS has evolved and has played an increasingly important role in the management of the complications of portal hypertension. This review will focus on the history, current application and management of complications of TIPS in China.

TIPS placement as the first-line therapy to prevent variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and sarcopenia

PURPOSE

Sarcopenia increases the risk of mortality and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) in cirrhosis, and is a potential indication for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). The aim was to investigate the prognostic effect of sarcopenia in patients with cirrhosis who received TIPS for prevention of variceal rebleeding.

METHOD

We retrospectively included 262 patients with cirrhosis receiving TIPS as the first-line treatment for prevention of rebleeding. L3 skeletal muscle index (SMI) was measured and sarcopenia was defined using sex-specific cutoffs. Incidence of post-TIPS mortality and overt HE, and changes of L3-SMI before and after TIPS were compared between the non-sarcopenia and sarcopenia group. Moreover, 21 patients with sarcopenia who received TIPS as the second-line treatment were included for additional comparison.

RESULTS

At admission, 99 (37.8 %) and 163 (62.2 %) patients were diagnosed as sarcopenia and non-sarcopenia, respectively. Compared with the non-sarcopenia group, the sarcopenia group had a similar risk of mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.04, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.96, p = 0.900) and overt HE (adjusted HR 1.20, 95 %CI 0.72-2.00, p = 0.479). The sarcopenia group achieved higher extent of L3-SMI improvement after TIPS than the non-sarcopenia group (7.0 vs 2.4 cm²/m² in males; 4.2 vs 3.3 cm²/m² in females). For patients with sarcopenia, TIPS as the second-line treatment significantly increased mortality risk compared with TIPS as the first-line treatment (adjusted HR 2.68, 95 %CI 1.05-6.87, p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients treated with TIPS as the first-line treatment for prevention of rebleeding, baseline sarcopenia did not increase the risk of post-TIPS mortality and overt HE.

Pre-emptive TIPSS in Acute Variceal Bleeding: Current Status, Controversies, and Future Directions

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is associated with significant short-term morbidity and mortality. Pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (p-TIPSS) is recommended to prevent rebleeding in AVB patients with a high risk of rebleeding. Despite the benefit of preventing rebleeding and de-novo ascites, the uptake of p-TIPSS remains low because logistic challenges in the real-world setting. In this review, we summarize the current evidence and controversies on p-TIPSS including patient selection for p-TIPSS, particularly in the setting of NASH cirrhosis and acute-on-chronic liver failure, the role of sarcopenia, renal impairment in the setting of p-TIPSS. Finally, we summarize both pharmacological and nonpharmacological strategies to optimize outcomes in patients undergoing p-TIPSS.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI < 30 kg/m²] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] > 10 mmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography > 25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70 g/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1 g/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250 mg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C  ≤ 13 or Child-Pugh B > 7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG > 20 mmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

Recent updates in preemptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for acute variceal bleeding

Content available: Author Interview and Audio Recording.

A comprehensive review of prognostic scoring systems to predict survival after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement

Patient prognosis after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement is relatively poor and highly heterogeneous; therefore, a prognostic scoring system is essential for survival prediction and risk stratification. Conventional scores include the Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) and model for end‐stage liver disease (MELD) scores. The CTP score was created empirically and displayed a high correlation with post‐TIPS survival. However, the inclusion of subjective parameters and the use of discrete cut‐offs limit its utility. The advantages of the MELD score include its statistical validation and objective and readily available predictors that contribute to its broad application in clinical practice to predict post‐TIPS outcomes. In addition, multiple modifications of the MELD score, by incorporating additional predictors (e.g., MELD‐Sodium and MELD‐Sarcopenia scores), adjusting coefficients (recalibrated MELD score), or combined (MELD 3.0), have been proposed to improve the prognostic ability of the standard MELD score. Despite several updates to conventional scores, a prognostic score has been proposed (based on contemporary data) specifically for outcome prediction after TIPS placement. However, this novel score (the Freiburg index of post‐TIPS survival, FIPS) exhibited inconsistent discrimination in external validation studies, and its superiority over conventional scores remains undetermined. Additionally, several tools display potential for application in specific TIPS indications (e.g., bilirubin‐platelet grade for refractory ascites), and biomarkers of systemic inflammation, nutritional status, liver disease progression, and cardiac decompensation may provide additional value, but require further validation. Future studies should consider the effect of TIPS placement when exploring predictors, as TIPS is a pathophysiological approach that substantially alters systemic hemodynamics and ameliorates bacterial translocation and malnutrition.

North American Practice-Based Recommendations for Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts in Portal Hypertension

Complications of portal hypertension, including ascites, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatic encephalopathy, are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite few high-quality randomized controlled trials to guide therapeutic decisions, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation has emerged as a crucial therapeutic option to treat complications of portal hypertension. In North America, the decision to perform TIPS involves gastroenterologists, hepatologists, and interventional radiologists, but TIPS creation is performed by interventional radiologists. This is in contrast to other parts of the world where TIPS creation is performed primarily by hepatologists. Thus, the successful use of TIPS in North America is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach and technical expertise, so as to optimize outcomes. Recently, new procedural techniques, TIPS stent technology, and indications for TIPS have emerged. As a result, practices and outcomes vary greatly across institutions and significant knowledge gaps exist. In this consensus statement, the Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches group critically reviews the application of TIPS in the management of portal hypertension. Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches convened a multidisciplinary group of North American experts from hepatology, interventional radiology, transplant surgery, nephrology, cardiology, pulmonology, and hematology to critically review existing literature and develop practice-based recommendations for the use of TIPS in patients with any cause of portal hypertension in terms of candidate selection, procedural best practices and, post-TIPS management; and to develop areas of consensus for TIPS indications and the prevention of complications. Finally, future research directions are identified related to TIPS for the management of portal hypertension.

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.

Imaging-guided interventions modulating portal venous flow: evidence and controversies

Portal hypertension is defined by an increase in the portosystemic venous gradient. In most cases, increased resistance to portal blood flow is the initial cause of elevated portal pressure. More than 90% of cases of portal hypertension are estimated to be due to advanced chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, a non-pharmacological treatment for portal hypertension, involve the placement of a stent between the portal vein and the hepatic vein or inferior vena cava which helps bypass hepatic resistance. Portal hypertension may also be a result of extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis or compression. In these cases, percutaneous portal vein recanalisation restores portal trunk patency, thus preventing portal hypertension-related complications. Any portal blood flow impairment leads to progressive parenchymal atrophy and triggers hepatic regeneration in preserved areas. This provides the rationale for using portal vein embolisation to modulate hepatic volume in preparation for extended hepatic resection. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive evidence-based review of the rationale for, and outcomes associated with, the main imaging-guided interventions targeting the portal vein, as well as to discuss the main controversies around such approaches.

Direct intrahepatic portocaval shunt (DIPS) or transjugular transcaval intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TTIPS) to treat complications of portal hypertension: Indications, technique, and outcomes beyond Budd-Chiari syndrome

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is nowadays the benchmark treatment of severe portal hypertension complications. However, besides usual contraindication to the procedure (namely recurrent hepatic encephalopathy, severe liver dysfunction, right heart failure and/or pulmonary hypertension), TIPS appears regularly unfeasible due to abnormal and/or distorted anatomy. In this situation, the only non-surgical approaches to treat severe portal hypertension consist in the creation of an intrahepatic portocaval shunt from percutaneous (direct intrahepatic portocaval shunt - DIPS) or transjugular route (transjugular transcaval intrahepatic portosystemic shunt - TTIPS). These procedures have been rapidly adopted in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome but are only poorly reported in patients with cirrhosis and without BCS. Considering the broadening landscape of TIPS indication in patients with cirrhosis within the last ten years, we aimed to describe the techniques, safety and efficacy of DIPS and TTIPS procedures as an alternative to TIPS in case of unfavourable anatomy.

Does preemptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt improve survival after acute variceal bleeding? Systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A preemptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (p-TIPSS) after acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is advocated. However, when compared with the current standard of care, the survival benefit of p-TIPSS is questionable. We performed a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) to assess the survival benefit of p-TIPSS in patients with cirrhosis and AVB.

METHODS

Comprehensive literature search of three bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane) was conducted from inception till May 2021. All study types evaluating the survival benefit of p-TIPSS in AVB were considered for inclusion. The relative risk (RR) of mortality and rebleeding at 6 weeks and mortality at 1 year with a random-effects model was computed. Trial sequential analysis was performed for the primary outcome of 6-week mortality.

RESULTS

A total of nine studies (four RCTs and five cohort studies) comprising 2861 patients with AVB were included. The overall pooled risks of mortality at 6 weeks and 1 year were 17.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.5-19.3%) and 26.7% (95% CI: 25.0-28.3%), respectively. Although p-TIPSS was associated with lower 6-week rebleeding risk (RR = 0.20; 95% CI = 0.13-0.29, I²  = 0%), data from pooled RCTs showed no significant difference in mortality at 6 weeks (RR = 0.33; 95% CI = 0.08-1.36, I²  = 63%) or at 1 year (RR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.51-1.14, I²  = 30%). Using trial sequential analysis, required sample size to detect a 20% relative risk reduction in mortality at 6 weeks with p-TIPSS was estimated to be 6317, which is beyond the total number of patients available for analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis found that the available data from RCTs are insufficient to confer 6-week mortality benefit with p-TIPSS compared with standard of care; thus, adequately powered RCTs are required.

Molecular targeted therapy causes hepatic encephalopathy in patients after Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS): A case report and literature review

We report two cases of hepatic encephalopathy caused by molecular targeted drugs after the Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure in our center. The liver toxicities and anti-angiogenic effects induced by targeted drugs may generate an imbalance in ammonia metabolism, elevating blood ammonia levels. TIPS diverts partial blood supply from the liver, aggravates liver impairment, and shunts ammonia-rich blood from the intestine into the systemic circulation. These may be the mechanisms leading to hepatic encephalopathy caused by molecular targeted drugs following TIPS. When clinicians choose molecular targeted therapy as the second or third targeted therapy for patients who have undergone TIPS, the consequence of drug-induced hepatic encephalopathy should also be considered.

Immune evasion mechanisms and therapeutic strategies in gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC) is a malignancy with a high incidence and mortality. The tumor immune microenvironment plays an important role in promoting cancer development and supports GC progression. Accumulating evidence shows that GC cells can exert versatile mechanisms to remodel the tumor immune microenvironment and induce immune evasion. In this review, we systematically summarize the intricate crosstalk between GC cells and immune cells, including tumor-associated macrophages, neutrophils, myeloid-derived suppressor cells, natural killer cells, effector T cells, regulatory T cells, and B cells. We focus on how GC cells alter these immune cells to create an immunosuppressive microenvironment that protects GC cells from immune attack. We conclude by compiling the latest progression of immune checkpoint inhibitor-based immunotherapies, both alone and in combination with conventional therapies. Anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 and anti-programmed cell death protein 1/programmed death-ligand 1 therapy alone does not provide substantial clinical benefit for GC treatment. However, the combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors with chemotherapy or targeted therapy has promising survival advantages in refractory and advanced GC patients. This review provides a comprehensive understanding of the immune evasion mechanisms of GC, and highlights promising immunotherapeutic strategies.