Serum Lipoprotein (a) on Postoperative Day 3: A Strong Predictor of Portal and/or Splenic Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhotic Patients With Splenectomy

Comparison of long-term outcomes of splenectomy with periesophagogastric devascularization and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in treating cirrhotic portal hypertension patients with recurrent variceal bleeding

PURPOSE

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and splenectomy with periesophagogastric devascularization (SPD) are widely used to treat cirrhotic portal hypertension (PH) and prevent variceal rebleeding. However, direct comparisons between these two approaches are rare. This study was designed to compare the long-term outcomes of TIPS and SPD in patients with cirrhotic PH and variceal rebleeding.

METHODS

The study included cirrhotic PH patients with a history of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding between 18 and 80 years of age who were admitted to the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2012 to January 2022. Patients were enrolled into two groups according to TIPS or SPD was performed. Baseline characteristics were matched using propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

A total of 230 patients underwent TIPS, while 184 underwent SPD. PSM was carried out to balance available covariates, resulting in a total of 83 patients in the TIPS group and 83 patients in the SPD group. Patients in SPD group had better liver function during 60 months follow-up. Five-year overall survival rates in SPD group and TIPS group were 72 and 27%, respectively, at 2 years were 88 and 86%, respectively. The 2- and 5-year freedom from variceal rebleeding rates were 95 and 80% in SPD group and 80 and 54% in TIPS group.

CONCLUSIONS

SPD is clearly superior to TIPS in terms of OS and freedom from variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhotic PH. In addition, SPD improved liver function in patients with cirrhotic PH.

Exploring the role of lipoprotein(a) in cardiovascular diseases and diabetes in Chinese population

A high level of lipoprotein (a) in the plasma has been associated with a variety of cardiovascular diseases and is considered to be an independent predictor of some other diseases. Based on recent studies, the concentration levels of Lp(a) in the Chinese population exhibit a distinctive variation from other populations. In the Chinese population, a high level of Lp(a) indicates a higher incidence of revascularization, platelet aggregation, and thrombogenicity following PCI. Increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in Chinese population has been linked to higher levels of Lp(a), according to studies. More specifically, it has been found that in Chinese populations, higher levels of Lp(a) were linked to an increased risk of coronary heart disease, severe aortic valve stenosis, deep vein thrombosis in patients with spinal cord injuries, central vein thrombosis in patients receiving hemodialysis, and stroke. Furthermore, new and consistent data retrieved from several clinical trials also suggest that Lp (a) might also play an essential role in some other conditions, including metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes and cancers. This review explores the clinical and epidemiological relationships among Lp(a), cardiovascular diseases and diabetes in the Chinese population as well as potential Lp(a) underlying mechanisms in these diseases. However, further research is needed to better understand the role of Lp(a) in cardiovascular diseases and especially diabetes in the Chinese population.

Lipoprotein(a) and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases: Evidence from Chinese Population

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Multiple factors are involved in CVD, and emerging data indicate that lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) may be associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) independent of other traditional risk factors. Lp(a) has been identified as a novel therapeutic target. Previous studies on the influence of Lp(a) in CVD have mainly used in western populations. In this review, the association of plasma Lp(a) concentration with ASCVD was summarized, with regards to epidemiological, population-based observational, and pathological studies in Chinese populations. Lp(a) mutations and copy number variations in Chinese populations are also explored. Finally, the impact of plasma Lp(a) levels on patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, cancer, and familial hypercholesterolemia are discussed.

Lipoprotein(a): Pathophysiology, measurement, indication and treatment in cardiovascular disease. A consensus statement from the Nouvelle Société Francophone d'Athérosclérose (NSFA)

Lipoprotein(a) is an apolipoprotein B100-containing low-density lipoprotein-like particle that is rich in cholesterol, and is associated with a second major protein, apolipoprotein(a). Apolipoprotein(a) possesses structural similarity to plasminogen but lacks fibrinolytic activity. As a consequence of its composite structure, lipoprotein(a) may: (1) elicit a prothrombotic/antifibrinolytic action favouring clot stability; and (2) enhance atherosclerosis progression via its propensity for retention in the arterial intima, with deposition of its cholesterol load at sites of plaque formation. Equally, lipoprotein(a) may induce inflammation and calcification in the aortic leaflet valve interstitium, leading to calcific aortic valve stenosis. Experimental, epidemiological and genetic evidence support the contention that elevated concentrations of lipoprotein(a) are causally related to atherothrombotic risk and equally to calcific aortic valve stenosis. The plasma concentration of lipoprotein(a) is principally determined by genetic factors, is not influenced by dietary habits, remains essentially constant over the lifetime of a given individual and is the most powerful variable for prediction of lipoprotein(a)-associated cardiovascular risk. However, major interindividual variations (up to 1000-fold) are characteristic of lipoprotein(a) concentrations. In this context, lipoprotein(a) assays, although currently insufficiently standardized, are of considerable interest, not only in stratifying cardiovascular risk, but equally in the clinical follow-up of patients treated with novel lipid-lowering therapies targeted at lipoprotein(a) (e.g. antiapolipoprotein(a) antisense oligonucleotides and small interfering ribonucleic acids) that markedly reduce circulating lipoprotein(a) concentrations. We recommend that lipoprotein(a) be measured once in subjects at high cardiovascular risk with premature coronary heart disease, in familial hypercholesterolaemia, in those with a family history of coronary heart disease and in those with recurrent coronary heart disease despite lipid-lowering treatment. Because of its clinical relevance, the cost of lipoprotein(a) testing should be covered by social security and health authorities.