Construction of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt: Bare Metal Stent/Stent-graft Combination versus Single Stent-graft, a Prospective Randomized Controlled Study with Long-term Patency and Clinical Analysis

Comparison of specialized stent versus generic stent and bare stent combination for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation using the Viatorr stent remains relatively uncommon in underdeveloped and high-burden disease regions in Asia-Pacific, and there is a lack of comparative studies regarding its prognostic effects compared with the generic stent-graft/bare stent combination. The purpose of this retrospective study is to compare the prognostic endpoints of these two treatments in patients who underwent TIPS creation. Clinical data from 145 patients were collected, including 82 in the combination group and 63 in the Viatorr group. Differences in prognostic endpoints (shunt dysfunction, death, overt hepatic encephalopathy [OHE], rebleeding) between the two groups were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify independent risk factors for post-TIPS shunt dysfunction. The TIPS procedure was successful in all patients. After TIPS creation, both groups showed a significant decrease in porto-caval pressure gradient compared to that before TIPS creation. The stent patency rates at 6, 12, and 18 months were high in both the combination and Viatorr groups (93.7%, 88.5%, and 88.5% vs. 96.7%, 93.4%, and 93.4%, respectively). The stent patency rates was higher in the combination group than in the Viatorr group, although not statistically significant (HR = 2.105, 95% CI 0.640-6.922, Log-rank P = 0.259). There were no significant differences in other prognostic endpoints (death, OHE, rebleeding) between the two groups. The Cox model identified portal vein diameter (HR = 0.807, 95% CI 0.658-0.990, P = 0.040) and portal vein thrombosis (HR = 13.617, 95% CI 1.475-125.678, P = 0.021) as independent risk factors for post-TIPS shunt dysfunction. The shunt patency rates between the Viatorr stent and the generic stent-graft/bare stent combination showed no significant difference and the generic stent-graft/bare stent combination may be a viable alternative in areas where the Viatorr stent is not yet available.

Stent fracture after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement using the bare metal stent/stent-graft combination technique

BACKGROUND

A transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is widely placed to treat portal hypertension. Because the Viatorr® stent (W. L. Gore and Associates, Flagstaff, AZ, United States) is not available in all hospitals in China, the bare metal stent (BMS)/stent-graft combination technique is still popular for TIPS construction. Stent fracture is a complication after TIPS placement using this technique, with limited available literature focusing on it.

AIM

To assess the incidence of stent fracture after TIPS placement using the BMS/ stent-graft combination technique and to identify the risk factors for stent fracture. We proposed technique modifications to improve the clinical results of TIPS placement with the BMS/stent-graft combination technique.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the computed tomography (CT) data of all patients with portal hypertension who underwent the TIPS procedure between June 2011 and December 2021 in a single center. Patients implanted with the BMS/stent graft and had follow-up imaging data available were included. We identified patients with stent fracture and analyzed their characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to identify the potential predictors of stent fracture.

RESULTS

Of the 68 included patients, stent fracture occurred in seven (10.3%) patients. Based on CT images, the stent fractures were categorized into three types. Our study consisted of four (57.1%) type I fractures, one (14.3%) type II fracture, one (14.3%) type IIIa fracture, and one (14.3%) type IIIb fracture. After adjusting for covariates, multivariable logistic regression revealed that the risk factors for stent fracture were the implantation of a greater number of stents [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 22.2, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.2-415.4, P = 0.038] and a larger proximal sagittal stent bending angle (aOR = 1.1, 95%CI: 1.0-1.3, P = 0.020).

CONCLUSION

Stent fracture occurred in approximately 10% of patients with portal hypertension who underwent TIPS with the BMS/stent-graft combination technique. The number of implanted stents and stent bending angle at the inferior vena cava end were predictors of stent fracture, which suggests that the incidence of stent fracture could potentially be reduced by procedural modifications.

Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stents versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in people with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a widely used procedure for management of uncontrolled upper gastrointestinal bleeding and refractory ascites in people with liver cirrhosis. However, nearly half of the people experience shunt dysfunction and recurrent symptoms within one year of the procedure. Expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stents are assumed to decrease shunt dysfunction by approximately 20% to 30%.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms associated with the use of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stents versus bare stents in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs) for managing people with liver cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 28 February 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents in TIPS for treatment of people with liver cirrhosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. procedure-related complications, and 3. health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were 4. upper gastrointestinal bleeding, 5. recurrence of ascites, 6. hepatic encephalopathy, 7. kidney failure, 8. early thrombosis, 9. non-serious adverse events, and 10. shunt dysfunction. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence. We analysed outcome data at the maximum follow-up, except for the 'early thrombosis' outcome for which it was within 12 weeks after the TIPS procedure.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four trials with 565 randomised participants (age range: 18 to 75 years; male range: 63.6% to 75.0%). A total of 527 participants provided data for analyses because of losses to follow-up. Two trials were conducted in China; one in France; and one in France, Spain, and Canada. Participants were classified with cirrhosis Child-Pugh class A, B, or C, and for some, the class was not reported. We used intention-to-treat principle (four trials) and per-protocol analysis (one trial) to meta-analyse the data. One trial compared ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of the same diameter and three trials compared ePTFE-covered stents versus stents of different diameters. ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of the same diameter One trial with 258 participants compared 8 mm covered stent versus 8 mm bare stent. Mortality in the covered stent group is possibly lower than in the bare stent group (risk ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43 to 0.92; low-certainty evidence). Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.84), recurrence of ascites (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.87), and shunt dysfunction (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.61) occurred more often in the bare stent group than in the covered stent group (all low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in hepatic encephalopathy between groups (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.61; very low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report data on procedure-related complications, health-related quality of life, early thrombosis, and segmental liver ischaemia (a non-serious adverse event). ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of different stent diameters Three trials compared ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of different diameters (10.5 (standard deviation (SD) 0.9) mm versus 11.7 (SD 0.8) mm; 8 mm versus 10 mm; and one trial used 10-mm stents that could be dilated from 8 mm to 10 mm). There was no evidence of a difference between the ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents groups in mortality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; 3 trials, 269 participants), procedure-related complications (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.57; 1 trial, 80 participants), upper gastrointestinal bleeding (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.38; 3 trials, 269 participants), hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.30; 3 trials, 269 participants), and kidney failure (RR 7.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 143.92; 1 trial, 121 participants) (all very low-certainty evidence). Recurrence of ascites (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.85; 3 trials, 269 participants; low-certainty evidence), shunt dysfunction (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.92; 3 trials, 269 participants; low-certainty evidence), and early thrombosis (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.82; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 261 participants; very low-certainty evidence) occurred more often in the bare stents group. There was no evidence of a difference in segmental liver ischaemia (RR 5.25, 95% CI 0.26 to 106.01; 1 trial, 80 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trial presented data on health-related quality of life. Funding One trial did not clearly report funding sources. The remaining three trials declared that they had no funding with vested interests.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the small number of trials with insufficient sample size and events, and study limitations, we assessed the overall certainty of evidence in the predefined outcomes as low or very low. Therefore, we are uncertain which of the two interventions (ePTFE-covered stents or bare stents of the same diameter and ePTFE-covered stents versus bare stents of different stent diameters) is effective for the evaluated outcomes. None of the four trials reported data on health-related quality of life, and data on complications were either missing or rarely reported. We lack high-quality trials to evaluate the role of ePTFE-covered stents for TIPS for managing people with liver cirrhosis.

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.

A meta-analysis of combined generic-covered stent-graft with or without bare-metal stent for refractory variceal bleeding

Objectives:

The meta-analysis was conducted to systematically assess the efficacy and safety of generic stent-graft/bare-stent combination compared with Fluency stent alone in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedure for refractory variceal bleeding.

Methods:

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database were searched for relevant studies from January 1990 to September 2020; outcome measures studied were primary patency, hepatic encephalopathy, survival, re-bleeding and portal venous pressure.

Results:

Four studies (1 randomised controlled trial and 3 retrospective studies) with 449 subjects (157 patients in the combined stent group and 292 patients in the covered stent group) were included. No significant difference was observed in the incidence of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.069, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.524, 2.178]), hepatic encephalopathy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.860, 95% CI [0.341, 2.169], P = 0.750) and re-bleeding (OR = 1.049, 95% CI [0.226, 4.881], P = 0.951). Compared with Fluency stent alone, combination therapy was associated with moderate decrease in outcomes on the post-operative portal venous pressure (standard mean difference [SMD] −0.210, 95% CI [−0.418, −0.001], P = 0.049) and was not associated with significant decrease in outcomes on the pre-operative portal venous pressure (SMD − 0.129, 95% CI [−0.336, 0.078], P = 0.223). The primary patency was significantly lower in the Fluency/bare-stent combination group (HR = 0.473, 95% CI [0.288, 0.776]).

Conclusions:

Generic stent-graft/bare-stent combination therapy was associated with significantly lower primary patency compared to Fluency stent alone.

A new choice of stent for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation: Viabahn ePTFE covered stent/bare metal stent combination

Objectives

To compare the clinical outcomes in terms of structure and function between the insertion of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) created with the Viabahn ePTFE covered stent/bare metal stent (BMS) combination and the Fluency ePTFE covered stent/BMS combination.

Methods

A total of 101 consecutive patients who received a TIPS from February 2016 to August 2018 in our center were retrospectively analyzed. Sixty-four subjects were enrolled in the Viabahn group and 37 were enrolled in the Fluency group. The geometry characteristics of the TIPS were calculated, and the associated occurrence of shunt dysfunction, survival, overt hepatic encephalopathy, and variceal rebleeding were evaluated.

Results

The technical success rate was 100%. After the insertion of the TIPS, the rate of shunt dysfunction during the first 3 months was significantly different between the Viabahn and Fluency groups (1.6% and 13.5%, respectively; p ​= ​0.024). Multivariate analysis indicated that the angle of portal venous inflow (α) was the only independent risk factor for shunt dysfunction (hazard ratio ​= ​1.060, 95% confidence interval ​= ​1.009–1.112, p ​= ​0.020). In addition, 3 months after the TIPS insertion, the α angle distinctly increased from 20.9° ​± ​14.3°–26.9° ​± ​20.1° (p ​= ​0.005) in the Fluency group but did not change significantly in the Viabahn group (from 21.9° ​± ​15.1°–22.9° ​± ​17.6°, p ​= ​0.798).

Conclusions

Shunt dysfunction was related to the α angle owing to the slight effect on the α angle after the implantation of the TIPS. The Viabahn ePTFE covered stent/BMS combination was more stable in structure and promised higher short-term stent patency compared with the Fluency ePTFE covered stent/BMS combination.

Portal vein puncture-related complications during transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation: Colapinto needle set vs Rösch-Uchida needle set

Transjugular portal vein puncture is considered the riskiest step in TIPS creation with possible incidence of portal vein puncture-related complications (PVPC). The Colapinto and the Rösch-Uchida needle sets are two different needle sets currently available. To date, there have been no randomized control trials or systematic reviews which compare the incidence of PVPC when using the two different needle sets. The aim of this literature review is to assess the rate of PVPC associated with the different needle sets used in the creation of TIPS. From the described search, 1500 articles were identified and 34 met the inclusion criteria. Outcome measured was the prevalence of PVPC using the different needle sets. Overall 212 (3.6%) PVPC were reported in 5865 patients; 142 (3.5%) reported in 4000 cases using the Rösch-Uchida set and 70 (3.7%) in 1865 patients using the Colapinto set (p = 0.69). PVPC in TIPS creation are not related to the choice of needle set used in the procedure. To our knowledge, this is the first review of its kind, the results of which support the theory that while the rate of PVPC is influenced by many factors, choice of needle set does not seem to be one of them.

Impact of TIPS on Splenic Volume and Thrombocytopenia

OBJECTIVE. Splenomegaly and thrombocytopenia are common complications in patients with cirrhosis. The present study aimed to evaluate changes in splenic volumes and platelet counts after TIPS insertion. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A total of 104 patients who had a diagnosis of portal hypertension and had undergone TIPS placement between November 2015 and August 2019 were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. We retrospectively calculated splenic volumes before TIPS placement and at 1-2 and 6-12 months after TIPS placement and monitored the platelet count at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after TIPS placement. RESULTS. The mean (± SD) portal pressure gradient before TIPS placement was 28.3 ± 4.6 mm Hg; after TIPS placement, it was 11.3 ± 4.5 mm Hg (p < .001). The mean splenic volume of all 104 patients before TIPS placement was 868 ± 409 cm³, and at 1-2 months after TIPS placement, it was 710 ± 336 cm³ (p < .001). Among the 43 patients for whom splenic volume data were available at both 1-2 and 6-12 months after TIPS placement, the mean splenic volume decreased from 845 ± 342 cm³ to 691 ± 301 cm³ and then to 674 ± 333 cm³, respectively. Correspondingly, the number of patients with severe thrombocytopenia decreased from 25 patients (35.7%) before the TIPS procedure to 16 patients (22.9%) in the 1-2 months after TIPS placement and then to 11 patients (15.7%) in the 6-12 months after TIPS implantation. The increase in the platelet count was significantly correlated with decreasing splenic volume (r² = 0.3735; p < .001). CONCLUSION. In most patients, TIPS placement resulted in a significant decrease in splenic volume and a significant increase in the platelet count during the same period.

Efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) created using covered stents of different diameters: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to make a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the stent diameter (8mm vs. 10mm) that conveys better safety and clinical efficacy for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Four databases were used to identify clinical trials published from inception until March 2020. Data were extracted to estimate and compare one-year and three-year overall survivals, hepatic encephalopathy, variceal rebleeding, and shunt dysfunction rates between patients with 8mm covered stents and those with 10mm covered stents.

RESULTS

Five eligible studies were selected, which included 489 patients (316 men, 173 women). The 8mm covered stent group had higher efficacy regarding one-year or three-year overall survival (odds ratio [OR], 2.88; P=0.003) and (OR, 1.81; P=0.04) and lower hepatic encephalopathy (OR, 0.69; P=0.04) compared with 10mm covered stent group. There were no significant differences in variceal rebleeding rate (OR 0.80; P=0.67). However, shunt dysfunction was lower in 10mm covered stent group (OR, 2.26; P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the use of 8mm covered stents should be preferred to that of 10mm covered stents for TIPS placement when portal pressure is frequently monitored.

The Pull-Through Technique for Recanalization of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Dysfunction

Purpose

To evaluate the technical efficacy and safety of the pull-through technique in recanalization of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) when standard transjugular approach is inaccessible.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective review of patients underwent TIPS revision via the pull-through technique was performed. Transhepatic directly punctured stent was conducted if the portal vein could not be accessed via standard transjugular approach. Technical success was defined by recanalization of shunt. Clinical success was defined as bleeding interruption and ascites regression without pharmacological support. All patients were followed up by clinical evaluation and Doppler ultrasound.

Results

Between January 2010 and December 2016, a total of 63 patients underwent TIPS revision, and 14 of them could not be accessed via standard transjugular approaches owing to stenosis or occlusion of the hepatic vein. The pull-through technique was successful in 13 patients, and one patient underwent parallel TIPS. No procedure-related complication was observed. One patient died of liver failure one week after the procedure. During the follow-up, three patients developed hepatic encephalopathy, and one patient developed TIPS dysfunction again and experienced variceal bleeding. The primary patency rate after TIPS revision was 92% (11/12) at 12 months.

Conclusion

The pull-through technique was effective and safe for recanalization of TIPS inaccessible via standard transjugular approach.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement in Patients with Schistosomiasis-Induced Liver Fibrosis

Purpose

Evaluate the efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) insertion on patients with schistosomiasis-induced liver fibrosis, and compare with that of patients with HBV-induced cirrhosis.

Materials and Methods

This was a retrospective study from November 2015 to December 2018 including 82 patients diagnosed with portal hypertension, one group of which is induced by schistosomiasis (n = 20), the other by hepatitis B virus (HBV) (n = 62). Both groups of subjects underwent TIPS placement for the management of portal hypertension complications.

Results

TIPS was inserted successfully in all patients (technical success 100%). After a median follow-up of 14 months following TIPS insertion, portal pressure gradient (PPG) value in both schistosomiasis-induced group and HBV-induced group underwent a significant decrease with no major difference between the two groups. There exists no significant difference demonstrated by Kaplan–Meier curves between two groups concerning cumulative rate of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) (log-rank p = 0.681), variceal rebleeding (log-rank p = 0.837) and survival (log-rank p = 0.429), and no statistically difference was found in terms of alleviation of portal vein thrombosis (PVT). In addition, splenectomy (HR 19, 95% CI 4–90, p < 0.001) was identified as independent predictor of PVT.

Conclusions

TIPS placement is well-founded to be considered as a safe and effective treatment in patients with schistosomiasis-induced portal hypertension and relevant severe complications. We also found the risk of PVT is 19 times higher in patients who underwent splenectomy than in untreated patients.

Level of Evidence

Historically controlled studies, level 4.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt:The Impact of Portal Venous Pressure Declines on Shunt Patency and Clinical Efficacy

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement using the same-diameter covered stents can lead to differed declines of portal venous pressure declines (PVDs). This study aimed to compare the long-term shunt patency and clinical efficacy of TIPS placement that caused low PVDs (≤9 mmHg) and high PVDs (>9 mmHg).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 129 patients treated by TIPS placement with 8 mm-diameter polytetrafluoroethylene covered stents were included and analyzed retrospectively. They were stratified into group A with low PVDs (n = 69) and group B with high PVDs (n = 60).

RESULTS

The 6-year actuarial probabilities of remaining free of shunt dysfunction (47.2% vs 64.6%; p = 0.007) and variceal rebleeding (48.3% vs 63.9%; p = 0.038) were significantly lower in group A than in group B. The 6-year actuarial probability of remaining free of hepatic encephalopathy was significantly higher in group A than in group B (44.5% vs 32.5%; p = 0.010), though the 6-year cumulative survival rate was similar in both groups (A vs B: 65.5% vs 56.0%; p = 0.240). The baseline portal vein thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.045, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.762-13.233; p = 0.000) and stent type (HR: 4.447, 95%CI: 1.711-11.559, p = 0.002) were associated with shunt dysfunction, whereas only ascites was associated with mortality (HR: 1.373, 95%CI: 1.114-3.215; p = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

High PVDs (>9 mmHg) were associated with higher shunt patency, lower incidence of variceal rebleeding, but higher frequency of hepatic encephalopathy and similar survival rate than low PVDs (≤9 mmHg) after TIPS placement.

Long-term shunt patency and overall survival of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement using covered stents with bare stents versus covered stents alone

AIM

To investigate the long-term shunt patency and overall survival of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement using covered stents with or without bare stents over a follow-up period up to 7 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 154 patients undergoing TIPS placement were enrolled and analysed retrospectively. They were divided into two groups: those undergoing TIPS placement using covered with bare stents (group A, n=42) and those without bare stents (group B, n=112).

RESULTS

The cumulative 5-year primary patency rate was significantly lower in group A than in group B (group A: 0% versus group B: 66.7%; p<0.001). The cumulative 5-year overall survival rates were comparable between the two groups (group A: 76% versus group B: 58.7%; p=0.214). The baseline portal vein thrombosis (hazard ratio [HR]:4.610; 95% confidence interval [CI]:2.691-7.897; p=0.000), portal pressure decrement (HR: 0.911; 95% CI: 0.845-0.982; p=0.015), and group (HR: 0.419; 95% CI: 0.239-0.736; p=0.002) were independent predictors for shunt dysfunction, while hepatocellular carcinoma (HR: 6.615; 95% CI: 2.863-15.283; p=0.000) and ascites (HR: 2.166; 95% CI: 1.298-3.615; p=0.003) were independent predictors for mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Although TIPS placement using covered with bare stents led to lowered long-term shunt patency than using covered stents alone, the overall survival rates were similar.

Primary constrained TIPS for treating refractory ascites or variceal bleeding secondary to hepatic cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

To report an initial experience using a primary constrained transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) technique for treating cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites or variceal bleeding.

METHODS

All patients undergoing primary constrained (n = 9) and conventional (n = 18) TIPS between July 2014 and June 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Preprocedure demographics, Child-Pugh, model for end-stage liver disease and technical variables were recorded. Outcomes measured included technical and clinical success, complications, 30-day mortality, as well as necessity for TIPS revision. Average (SD) and median follow-up was 237 (190) and 226 days.

RESULTS

All constrained and conventional TIPS were technically successful (100%). Clinical success as defined as a reduction or improvement in presenting symptoms was 88.9% (8/9) and 100% (18/18) in the constrained and conventional groups, respectively (p = 1). The average reduction in portosystemic gradient was lower in the constrained group, 6.1 mmHg compared with 10.6 mmHg in the conventional group (p = 0.73). The rate of hepatic encephalopathy following TIPS placement was higher in the conventional group [16.7% (3/18)] compared with 0% in the constrained group (p = 0.52). The percentage of patients requiring TIPS revision was lower in the constrained group, although the results were not significant (11.1 vs 22.2%, p = 0.63).

CONCLUSION

Primary constrained TIPS is a feasible modification to conventional TIPS with similar technical and clinical success rates. A trend towards a smaller reduction in the portosystemic gradient and need for revision was observed in the constrained group. Advances in knowledge: Primary constrained TIPS allows for greater stepwise control over shunt diameter and may represent an improved technique for patients at risk for hepatic encephalopathy.

Primary constrained TIPS for treating refractory ascites or variceal bleeding secondary to hepatic cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

To report an initial experience using a primary constrained transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) technique for treating cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites or variceal bleeding.

METHODS

All patients undergoing primary constrained (n = 9) and conventional (n = 18) TIPS between July 2014 and June 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Preprocedure demographics, Child-Pugh, model for end-stage liver disease and technical variables were recorded. Outcomes measured included technical and clinical success, complications, 30-day mortality, as well as necessity for TIPS revision. Average (SD) and median follow-up was 237 (190) and 226 days.

RESULTS

All constrained and conventional TIPS were technically successful (100%). Clinical success as defined as a reduction or improvement in presenting symptoms was 88.9% (8/9) and 100% (18/18) in the constrained and conventional groups, respectively (p = 1). The average reduction in portosystemic gradient was lower in the constrained group, 6.1 mmHg compared with 10.6 mmHg in the conventional group (p = 0.73). The rate of hepatic encephalopathy following TIPS placement was higher in the conventional group [16.7% (3/18)] compared with 0% in the constrained group (p = 0.52). The percentage of patients requiring TIPS revision was lower in the constrained group, although the results were not significant (11.1 vs 22.2%, p = 0.63).

CONCLUSION

Primary constrained TIPS is a feasible modification to conventional TIPS with similar technical and clinical success rates. A trend towards a smaller reduction in the portosystemic gradient and need for revision was observed in the constrained group. Advances in knowledge: Primary constrained TIPS allows for greater stepwise control over shunt diameter and may represent an improved technique for patients at risk for hepatic encephalopathy.

Recent advances in hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy describes the array of neurological alterations that occur during acute liver failure or chronic liver injury. While key players in the pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy, such as increases in brain ammonia, alterations in neurosteroid levels, and neuroinflammation, have been identified, there is still a paucity in our knowledge of the precise pathogenic mechanism. This review gives a brief overview of our understanding of the pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy and then summarizes the significant recent advances made in clinical and basic research contributing to our understanding, diagnosis, and possible treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. A literature search using the PubMed database was conducted in May 2017 using "hepatic encephalopathy" as a keyword, and selected manuscripts were limited to those research articles published since May 2014. While the authors acknowledge that many significant advances have been made in the understanding of hepatic encephalopathy prior to May 2014, we have limited the scope of this review to the previous three years only.