Emergent TIPS for acute gastroesophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the safety and effectiveness of emergent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for acute variceal bleeding (AVB) in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of thirty-three patients with AVB and HCC undergoing emergent TIPS creation from January 2016 to January 2022 were enrolled and were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcomes were the safety of emergent TIPS creation, the bleeding control rate, and the rebleeding rate. The secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), liver function, overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE), and shunt dysfunction.

RESULTS

Emergent TIPS creation was technically successful in 33 patients (100%) and one (3.0%) patient suffered a major procedure-related adverse event. The control rate of bleeding (within 5 days) was 100%. During a median follow-up period of 26.3 months, rebleeding occurred in 6 (18.2%) patients. The median OS was 20.0 months. The 6-week and 1-year survival rates were 87% and 65%, respectively. Laboratory tests showed no significant impairment of liver function following TIPS creation. The incidences of overt HE and shunt dysfunction were 24.2% and 6.1%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Emergent TIPS creation is feasible and effective for treatment of AVB in cirrhotic patients with HCC.

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.

The Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) in Treating Portal Hypertension in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Liver cancer is very frequent, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) accounts for the majority of liver cancer cases. Its growing incidence has been greatly affected by the increasing prevalence of metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). The latter is a new epidemic in our era. In fact, HCC is often generated from noncirrhotic liver and its treatment benefits from surgical and nonsurgical approaches, potentially bridged by transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) use. TIPS use is an effective treatment for portal hypertension complications, but its application in patients with HCC and clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) remains controversial due to concerns about tumor rupture, dissemination, and increased toxicity. The technical feasibility and safety of TIPS use in HCC patients have been evaluated in several studies. Despite concerns about intraprocedural complications, retrospective studies have shown high success rates and low complication rates in TIPS placement for HCC patients. TIPS use in combination with locoregional treatments, such as transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) or transarterial radioembolization (TARE), has been explored as a treatment option for HCC patients with portal hypertension. These studies have shown improved survival rates in patients undergoing TIPS in combination with locoregional treatments. However, the efficacy and toxicity of TACE in combination with TIPS use require careful evaluation, as changes in venous and arterial flow can affect treatment outcomes and complications. The results from studies evaluating the impact of TIPS on systemic therapy and surgical options are also promising. In conclusion, the TIPS is a sufficiently safe, useful item available for physicians treating complications of portal hypertension. Moreover, a TIPS can be used in combination with locoregional therapy in HCC patients. Systemic chemotherapy can also benefit of the use of TIPS placement. A complex interplay affects TIPS use with surgery. The latter needs further data. The TIPS is a useful and safe add-on treatment, changing the natural course of HCC progression. Its use is regulated by a sophisticated physiologic and pathophysiologic flow of evidence.

Emergent Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation for Acute Gastric Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma

A total of 42 cirrhotic patients (mean age, 51.7 years ± 10.8; 38 men) with hepatocellular carcinoma who underwent emergent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for controlling acute gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) were included in this multicenter retrospective study. Of these, 37 (88.1%) patients underwent emergent TIPS creation as the first-line treatment to control acute GVB. Five (11.9%) patients underwent emergent TIPS creation as a rescue/salvage treatment to control acute GVB after emergent endoscopic therapy and pharmacotherapy. Emergent TIPS creation was technically successful in 40 (95.2%) patients. Two (4.8%) patients had severe and moderate procedural adverse events. The median follow-up duration was 16.9 months (range, 0.1-100.8 months). Failure to control acute bleeding and failure to prevent rebleeding occurred in 8 (19.0%) patients during follow-up. Eighteen (42.9%) patients died during follow-up. Three (7.1%) patients had shunt dysfunction during follow-up. Overt hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 6 (14.3%) patients during follow-up.