Endoscopic sclerotherapy compared with percutaneous transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt after initial sclerotherapy in patients with acute variceal hemorrhage. A randomized, controlled trial

Outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation for the management of portal hypertension complications in cancer patients

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) or variations of portosystemic shunt creation procedure in cancer patients with portal hypertension (PHTN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single-center retrospective study was performed on cancer patients who underwent TIPS from September 2016 through June 2023. Forty consecutive cancer patients (mean age 61 years; 30 men, 10 women) were reviewed. For each patient, data regarding indication, the Child-Pugh (C-P) classification, international normalized ratio (INR), serum bilirubin level, creatinine level, and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score before the procedure and 1 month after the procedure were collected. Clinical efficacy was evaluated based on response, defined as the absence of significant variceal bleeding or clinically detectable ascites or hydrothorax following TIPS placement. Technical safety, complications, overall survival (OS), and incidence of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) were also assessed.

RESULTS

One month after TIPS, 31 (77.5%) patients had clinical response, and 9 (22.5%) had no response. The technical success rate was 100%. There were no major procedure-related complications. The primary indications for shunt creation were ascites in 18 (45%), variceal bleeding (47.5%), and hydrothorax (7.5%). The 1-, 3-, and 6-month mortality rates were 10%, 25%, and 40%, respectively. Among the 40 patients included, 24 (60%) had cirrhosis, most commonly due to hepatitis C infection, hepatitis B infection, alcoholic liver disease, or NASH. The remaining 16 patients (40%) were non-cirrhotic. The median MELD score pre-TIPS was 11.5 (range 6.5-20.1). C-P score before intervention included 4 (10%) cases in class A, 33 (82.5%) in B, and 3 (7.5%) in C. The median OS was 15.4 months (range 0.03-61 months) and significantly differed by C-P score for each group (P < 0.001). No significant correlations existed between OS and the MELD score or pre-TIPS laboratory data. Fourteen patients developed HE (34%) after the procedure, and only one patient (2.5%) required shunt reduction. Responders had significantly longer OS, with a median of 26.5 months compared to 1.1 months in non-responders (P < 0.001, 95% CI: 2.14-13.19). Nine (22.5%) patients had a stent placed through the tumor. Twenty-six patients (65%) had an unchanged C-P class after the procedure, while C-P worsened in 6 (15%) and improved in 4 (10%).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that TIPS and its variations for the portosystemic shunt creation can be a safe and effective option for managing portal hypertension complications in carefully selected cancer patients with relatively preserved liver function. The study demonstrated high technical success and encouraging clinical response rates. Additionally, overall survival appeared longer in patients who responded to TIPS compared to non-responders.

Comparative efficacy of early TIPS, Non-early TIPS, and Standard treatment in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cirrhosis is a chronic disease characterized by chronic liver inflammation and diffuse fibrosis. A combination of vasoactive drugs, preventive antibiotics, and endoscopy is the recommended standard treatment for patients with acute variceal bleeding; however, this has been challenged. We compared the effects of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), non-early TIPS, and standard treatment in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present network meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the criteria outlined in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews guidelines. The review has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and World Health Organization-approved trial registry databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating early TIPS, non-early TIPS, and standard treatment in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs (1894 patients) were included in the review. Compared with standard treatment, early TIPS [odds ratio (OR), 0.53; 95% credible interval (Cr), 0.30-0.94; surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), 98.3] had a lower risk of all-cause mortality (moderate-to-high-quality evidence), and early TIPS (OR, 0.19; 95% CrI, 0.11-0.28; SUCRA, 98.2) and non-early TIPS (OR, 0.30; 95% CrI, 0.23-0.42; SUCRA, 1.8) were associated with a lower risk of rebleeding (moderate-to-high-quality evidence). Early TIPS was not associated with a reduced risk of hepatic encephalopathy, and non-early TIPS (OR, 2.78; 95% CrI, 1.89-4.23, SUCRA, 0) was associated with an increased incidence of hepatic encephalopathy (moderate-to-high-quality evidence). There was no difference in the incidence of new or worsening ascites (moderate-to-high-quality evidence) among the three interventions.

CONCLUSION

Based on the moderate-to-high quality evidence presented in this study, early TIPS placement was associated with reduced all-cause mortality [with a median follow-up of 1.9 years (25th-75th percentile range 1.9-2.3 years)] and rebleeding compared to standard treatment and non-early TIPS. Although early TIPS and standard treatment had a comparable incidence of hepatic encephalopathy, early TIPS showed superiority over non-early TIPS in this aspect. Recent studies have also shown promising results in controlling TIPS-related hepatic encephalopathy. However, it is important to consider individual patient characteristics and weigh the potential benefits against the risks associated with early TIPS. Therefore, we recommend that clinicians carefully evaluate the patient's condition, considering factors such as severity of variceal bleeding, underlying liver disease, and overall clinical status, before making a treatment decision. Further well-designed RCTs comparing early TIPS with non-early TIPS are needed to validate these findings and provide more definitive guidance.

Prevention of post-tips hepatic encephalopathy: The search of the ideal candidate

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been used since more than 25 years to treat some of the complications of portal hypertension, especially variceal bleeding and ascites refractory to conventional therapy. TIPS establishes a communication between the portal and hepatic veins, inducing the blood to shift from the splanchnic circulation into the systemic vascular bed with the aim of decompressing the portal venous system, and avoids the major complications of portal hypertension. However, the shunt of the portal blood into the systemic circulation is the cause of one of the major complications of the procedure: the post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy (HE). To date, few pharmacological treatment has been proven effective to prevent this complication and thus, the identification of patients at high risk of post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy and the patients' carefully selection is the only way to prevent this frequent complication.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiologic Management of Portal Hypertension

Cirrhosis is a heterogeneous disease that cannot be studied as a single entity and is classified in two main prognostic stages: compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Portal hypertension, characterized by a pathological increase of the portal pressure and by the formation of portal-systemic collaterals that bypass the liver, is the initial and main consequence of cirrhosis and is responsible for the majority of its complications. A myriad of treatment options exists for appropriately managing the most common complications of portal hypertension, including acute variceal bleeding and refractory ascites. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Treatment for bleeding oesophageal varices in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with liver cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed within about one to three years after diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, including, among others, endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, and balloon tamponade. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the individual and relative benefits and harms of these treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis, through a network meta-analysis; and to generate rankings of the different treatments for acute bleeding oesophageal varices, according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until 17 December 2019, to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in people with cirrhosis and acute bleeding from oesophageal varices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only RCTs (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and acutely bleeding oesophageal varices. We excluded RCTs in which participants had bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those in whom initial haemostasis was achieved before inclusion into the trial, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS software, using Bayesian methods, and calculated the differences in treatments using odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed also the direct comparisons from RCTs using the same codes and the same technical details.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 RCTs (4580 participants) in the review. Forty-eight trials (4042 participants) were included in one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those with and without a previous history of bleeding. We included outcomes assessed up to six weeks. All trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 19 interventions were compared in the trials (sclerotherapy, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues, variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade, somatostatin analogues plus variceal band ligation, nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, no active intervention, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade plus somatostatin analogues, balloon tamponade plus vasopressin analogues, variceal band ligation plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus variceal band ligation, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and sclerotherapy plus vasopressin analogues). We have reported the effect estimates for the primary and secondary outcomes when there was evidence of differences between the interventions against the reference treatment of sclerotherapy, but reported the other results of the primary and secondary outcomes versus the reference treatment of sclerotherapy without the effect estimates when there was no evidence of differences in order to provide a concise summary of the results. Overall, 15.8% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment of sclerotherapy (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) died during the follow-up periods, which ranged from three days to six weeks. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.57, 95% CrI 1.04 to 2.41; network estimate; direct comparison: 4 trials; 353 participants) and vasopressin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.70, 95% CrI 1.13 to 2.62; network estimate; direct comparison: 2 trials; 438 participants). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, a higher proportion of people receiving balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy had more serious adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 4.23, 95% CrI 1.22 to 17.80; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 60 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, people receiving vasopressin analogues alone and those receiving variceal band ligation had fewer adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.96; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 219 participants; and rate ratio 0.40, 95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 77 participants; respectively). Based on low-certainty evidence, the proportion of people who developed symptomatic rebleed was smaller in people who received sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.94; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 105 participants). The evidence suggests considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons where sclerotherapy was the control intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone and vasopressin analogues alone (with supportive therapy) probably result in increased mortality, compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, vasopressin analogues alone and band ligation alone probably result in fewer adverse events compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy may result in large increases in serious adverse events compared to sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues may result in large decreases in symptomatic rebleed compared to sclerotherapy. In the remaining comparisons, the evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the interventions, compared to sclerotherapy.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in Spain. Clinical-epidemiological considerations in relation to a multicenter registry

OBJECTIVE

this study aimed to determine the epidemiological, technical and clinical data of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) performed by Interventional Radiology departments in Spain. Furthermore, the total number of TIPS carried out in Spain was determined and compared with other countries.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

a retrospective study was performed with the approval of the Ethical Committee of the Spanish Society of Interventional Radiology (SERVEI). A survey was performed with 31 items (demographic, technical and clinical data) for data acquisition on the current status of TIPS in Spain. The survey was sent to the 49 hospitals that SERVEI included in a previous registry with data of TIPS performed in Spain in 2016.

RESULTS

of the 49 centers surveyed, 33 (67.35 %) replied to the survey. These centers had completed 265 of the 415 TIPS that year in Spain. The most frequent indication was upper GI bleeding from gastroesophageal varices, which accounted for 144 (54.33 %); 62.26 % of the TIPS were performed urgently and 37.7 % on a scheduled basis. The technical success was 89.16 ± 20.9 %, with a rebleeding rate of 17.9 %. Sixty-nine patients (26.03 %) presented complications, 19.62 % of them minor and 6.41 % major. The 30-day mortality related to the disease was 14.33 %, while mortality at one year was 18.49 %.

CONCLUSION

notably in our study, the complications of TIPS did not show a clear relationship with the number of procedures performed. With regard to other countries like the United States and France, the number of TIPS in Spain per million inhabitants is currently substantially lower. There were no significant changes compared to the number completed in 2013.

Portosystemic shunts versus endoscopic intervention with or without medical treatment for prevention of rebleeding in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

People with liver cirrhosis who have had one episode of variceal bleeding are at risk for repeated episodes of bleeding. Endoscopic intervention and portosystemic shunts are used to prevent further bleeding, but there is no consensus as to which approach is preferable.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of shunts (surgical shunts (total shunt (TS), distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS), or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)) versus endoscopic intervention (endoscopic sclerotherapy or banding, or both) with or without medical treatment (non-selective beta blockers or nitrates, or both) for prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with liver cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the CHBG Controlled Trials Register; CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; LILACS (Bireme); Science Citation Index - Expanded (Web of Science); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science (Web of Science); as well as conference proceedings and the references of trials identified until 22 June 2020. We contacted study investigators and industry researchers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing shunts versus endoscopic interventions with or without medical treatment in people with cirrhosis who had recovered from a variceal haemorrhage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. When possible, we collected data to allow intention-to-treat analysis. For each outcome, we estimated a meta-analysed estimate of treatment effect across trials (risk ratio for binary outcomes). We used random-effects model meta-analysis as our main analysis and as a means of presenting results. We reported differences in means for continuous outcomes without a meta-analytic estimate due to high variability in their assessment among all trials. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 27 randomised trials with 1828 participants. Three trials assessed TSs, five assessed DSRSs, and 19 trials assessed TIPSs. The endoscopic intervention was sclerotherapy in 16 trials, band ligation in eight trials, and a combination of band ligation and either sclerotherapy or glue injection in three trials. In eight trials, endoscopy was combined with beta blockers (in one trial plus isosorbide mononitrate). We judged all trials to be at high risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence for all the outcome review results as very low (i.e. the true effects of the results are likely to be substantially different from the results of estimated effects). The very low evidence grading is due to the overall high risk of bias for all trials, and to imprecision and publication bias for some outcomes. Therefore, we are very uncertain whether portosystemic shunts versus endoscopy interventions with or without medical treatment have effects on all-cause mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.13; 1828 participants; 27 trials), on rebleeding (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.50; 1769 participants; 26 trials), on mortality due to rebleeding (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.76; 1779 participants; 26 trials), and on occurrence of hepatic encephalopathy, both acute (RR 1.60, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.92; 1649 participants; 24 trials) and chronic (RR 2.51, 95% CI 1.38 to 4.55; 956 participants; 13 trials). No data were available regarding health-related quality of life. Analysing each modality of portosystemic shunts individually (i.e. TS, DSRS, and TIPS) versus endoscopic interventions with or without medical treatment, we are very uncertain if each type of shunt has effect on all-cause mortality: TS, RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.13; 164 participants; 3 trials; DSRS, RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.33; 352 participants; 4 trials; and TIPS, RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.31; 1312 participants; 19 trial; on rebleeding: TS, RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.56; 127 participants; 2 trials; DSRS, RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.65; 330 participants; 5 trials; and TIPS, RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.55; 1312 participants; 19 trials; on mortality due to rebleeding: TS, RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.96; 164 participants; 3 trials; DSRS, RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.74; 352 participants; 5 trials; and TIPS, RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.04; 1263 participants; 18 trials; on acute hepatic encephalopathy: TS, RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.92; 115 participants; 2 trials; DSRS, RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.94 to 3.08; 287 participants; 4 trials, TIPS, RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.99; 1247 participants; 18 trials; and chronic hepatic encephalopathy: TS, Fisher's exact test P = 0.11; 69 participants; 1 trial; DSRS, RR 4.87, 95% CI 1.46 to 16.23; 170 participants; 2 trials; and TIPS, RR 1.88, 95% CI 0.93 to 3.80; 717 participants; 10 trials. The proportion of participants with shunt occlusion or dysfunction was overall 37% (95% CI 33% to 40%). It was 3% (95% CI 0.8% to 10%) following TS, 7% (95% CI 3% to 13%) following DSRS, and 47.1% (95% CI 43% to 51%) following TIPS. Shunt dysfunction in trials utilising polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents was 17% (95% CI 11% to 24%). Length of inpatient hospital stay and cost were not comparable across trials. Funding was unclear in 16 trials; 11 trials were funded by government, local hospitals, or universities.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence on whether portosystemic shunts versus endoscopy interventions with or without medical treatment in people with cirrhosis and previous hypertensive portal bleeding have little or no effect on all-cause mortality is very uncertain. Evidence on whether portosystemic shunts may reduce bleeding and mortality due to bleeding while increasing hepatic encephalopathy is also very uncertain. We need properly conducted trials to assess effects of these interventions not only on assessed outcomes, but also on quality of life, costs, and length of hospital stay.

Comparison of Therapies for Secondary Prophylaxis of Esophageal Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

The decision regarding the optimal secondary prophylactic treatment for esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) in hepatic cirrhosis is controversial. A network meta-analysis was conducted to assess the benefits of various treatments for the secondary prophylaxis of EVB in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

A thorough examination of databases, including EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Database of Controlled Trials, was conducted to identify relevant randomized controlled trials up to December 2019. Key primary outcomes included mortality and rebleeding. Within the identified databases, a network meta-analysis was performed. Results were expressed by using a 95% credible interval (CrI) and odds ratios (ORs). The quality of results was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

FINDINGS

Forty-eight trials with 4415 participants with cirrhosis and portal hypertension who had a history of recent variceal bleeding were included. Carvedilol ranked first (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA], 87.4%) in overall survival, and some advantage was suggested; however, the findings were not statistically significant, compared with endoscopic variceal ligation + nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) (OR, 0.59; CrI, 0.28, 1.3), NSBB + isosorbide mononitrate (OR, 0.67; CrI, 0.33, 1.4), and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) (OR, 0.52; CrI, 0.24, 1.1). NSBB + isosorbide mononitrate (SUCRA, 63.9%) ranked higher than NSBB + endoscopic variceal ligation (SUCRA, 49.6%) in reducing mortality. TIPS (SUCRA, 98.8%) ranked higher than other treatments in reducing rebleeding but did not confer any survival benefit.

IMPLICATIONS

TIPS ranks first in preventing rebleeding of secondary prophylaxis of EVB and carvedilol shows outstanding efficacy in improving survival. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: identifier CRD42019131814.

The Role of Spleen and Liver Elastography and Color-Doppler Ultrasound in the Assessment of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Function

The reference standard for assessing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) function is venography with portosystemic pressure gradient (PPG) measurement. This procedure is invasive and expensive; thus, we assessed the feasibility, reproducibility and diagnostic accuracy of color-Doppler ultrasound (CDUS) and spleen and liver stiffness (LS) measurements for identifying TIPS dysfunction. Twenty-four patients (15 undergoing TIPS placement and nine undergoing TIPS revision) consecutively underwent CDUS examination and LS and spleen stiffness (SS) determination by transient elastography (TE) and point shear-wave elastography (pSWE). All parameters were taken before TIPS placement/revision (1-15 d before) and 24 h after, just before revision by venography. pSWE inter-observer agreement was assessed by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). CDUS and elastographic data were correlated (Pearson coefficient) with pressure gradients (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG], PPG). Main determinants of TIPS dysfunction were investigated by linear regression. Forty-nine paired examinations were performed in total: 49 (100%) SS reliable measurements by pSWE and 38 (88%) by TE. The ICC for pSWE values was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81‒0.94). SS values significantly correlated with HVPG and PPG (R = 0.51, p = 0.01). The area under the Receiver-Operating Characteristic (AUROC) curve of SS for diagnosing TIPS dysfunction was 0.86 (95% CI 0.70‒0.96) using a 25 kPa cutoff. At multivariate analysis, the flow direction of the intrahepatic portal vein branches and SS values were independently associated to TIPS dysfunction. The intrahepatic portal vein branches flow direction and SS value are two simple, highly sensitive parameters accurately excluding TIPS dysfunction. SS measurement by pSWE is feasible, reproducible and both positively and significantly correlates with HVPG and PPG values.

Self-expanding metal stents versus TIPS in treatment of refractory bleeding esophageal varices: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Refractory and recurrent esophageal variceal (EV) bleeding can be life threatening. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used as a "bridge" therapy. However, their role in the treatment protocol is not established due to paucity in data. Methods  We searched multiple databases from inception through May 2019 to identify studies that reported on SEMS and TIPS in refractory EV hemorrhage. Our primary goals were to analyze and compare the pooled all-cause mortality, immediate bleeding control and rebleeding rates. Results  Five hundred forty-seven patients from 21 studies were analyzed (SEMS: 12 studies, 176 patients; TIPS: 9 studies, 398 patients). The pooled rate of all-cause mortality with SEMS was 43.6 % (95 % CI 28.6-59.8, I ²  = 38) and with TIPS was 27.9 % (95 % CI 16.3-43.6, I ²  = 91). The pooled rate of immediate bleeding control with SEMS was 84.5 % (95 % CI 74-91.2, I ²  = 40) and with TIPS was 97.9 % (95 % CI 87.7-99.7, I ²  = 0). The pooled rate of rebleeding with SEMS was 19.4 % (95 % CI 11.9-30.4, I ²  = 32) and with TIPS was 8.8 % (95 % CI 4.8-15.7, I ²  = 40). Conclusion  Use of SEMS in refractory EV hemorrhage demonstrates acceptable immediate bleeding control with good technical success rate. Mortality and rebleeding rates were lesser with TIPS, however, its superiority and/ or inferiority cannot be validated due to limitations in the comparison methodology.

Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Management of Portal Hypertension: Review and Update of the Literature

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a well-established procedure used in the management of complications of portal hypertension. Although the most robust evidence supports the use of TIPS as salvage therapy in variceal hemorrhage, secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, and treatment of refractory ascites, there is also data to suggest its efficacy in other indications such as hepatic hydrothorax, hepatorenal syndrome, and Budd-Chiari syndrome. Recent literature also suggests that TIPS may improve survival for certain subpopulations if placed early after variceal bleeding. This article provides an updated evidence-based review of the indications for TIPS. Outcomes, complications, and adequate patient selection are also discussed.

Comparision between portosystemic shunts and endoscopic therapy for prevention of variceal re-bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Portosystemic shunts, including surgical portosystemic shunts and transjugular intra-hepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), may have benefit over endoscopic therapy (ET) for treatment of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension; however, whether there being a survival benefit among them remains unclear. This study was to compare the effect of three above-mentioned therapies on the short-term and long-term survival in patient with cirrhosis.

Methods:

Using the terms “variceal hemorrhage or variceal bleeding or variceal re-bleeding” OR “esophageal and gastric varices” OR “portal hypertension” and “liver cirrhosis,” the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, and the references of identified trials were searched for human randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in any language with full texts or abstracts (last search June 2017). Risk ratio (RR) estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using random effects model by Review Manager. The quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for the assessment of the risk of bias.

Results:

Twenty-six publications comprising 28 RCTs were included in this analysis. These studies included a total of 2845 patients: 496 (4 RCTs) underwent either surgical portosystemic shunts or TIPS, 1244 (9 RCTs) underwent either surgical portosystemic shunts or ET, and 1105 (15 RCTs) underwent either TIPS or ET. There was no significant difference in overall mortality and 30-day or 6-week survival among three interventions. Compared with TIPS and ET, separately, surgical portosystemic shunts were both associated with a lower bleeding-related mortality (RR = 0.07, 95% CI = 0.01–0.32; P < 0.001; RR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.06–0.51, P < 0.005) and rate of variceal re-bleeding (RR = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.10–0.51, P < 0.001; RR = 0.10, 95% CI = 0.04–0.24, P < 0.001), without a significant difference in the rate of postoperative hepatic encephalopathy (RR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.25–1.00, P = 0.14; RR = 1.09, 95% CI = 0.59–2.01, P = 0.78). TIPS showed a trend toward lower variceal re-bleeding (RR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.36–0.58, P < 0.001), but a higher incidence of hepatic encephalopathy than ET (RR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.34–2.36, P < 0.001).

Conclusions:

The overall analysis revealed that there seem to be no short-term and long-term survival advantage, but surgical portosystemic shunts are with the lowest bleeding-related mortality among the three therapies. Surgical portosystemic shunts may be the most effective without an increased risk of hepatic encephalopathy and TIPS is superior to ET but at the cost of a higher incidence of hepatic encephalopathy. However, some of findings should be interpreted with caution due to the lower level of evidence and the existence of significant heterogeneity.

Clinical factors that influence the outcome of selective devascularization in the treatment of portal hypertension

There is a high incidence of death due to variceal hemorrhage in patients with portal hypertension. Factors to consider when choosing selective devascularization in the treatment of variceal hemorrhage remain a controversy. This study aims to generate the prevalent clinical risk factors that affect the outcomes of selective devascularization procedures. Elucidating these features may guide future treatment of esophageal varices in patients with portal hypertension. We retrospectively analyzed medical records of 455 patients who underwent selective devascularization procedures in our center. Patients were subject to splenectomy, selective devascularization with or without esophageal transection. The mode of surgery recurred in comparable rates in both the group with major complications postoperatively (high-risk group which consisted of 63 patients) or the group without major postoperative complications (low-risk group, 392). Risk factors that negatively influenced outcomes of surgery include severe symptoms (89% in high risk group and 71% in low risk group), large volume of blood loss in the hemorrhage before surgery (81% in high risk group and 16% in low risk group), sever liver cirrhosis (83% in high risk group and 67% in low risk group), previous endotherapy, prolonged prothrombin time, and poor liver function. Selective devascularization is a feasible option to treat variceal hemorrhage in patients with portal hypertension.

TIPS versus endoscopic therapy for variceal rebleeding in cirrhosis: A meta-analysis update

Endoscopic therapy (ET) is most common method for preventing variceal bleeding in cirrhosis, but the outcomes are not perfect. Recently, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is introduced into clinical practice. However, the beneficial effects of TIPS compared to ET on cirrhotic patients is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of TIPS with those of the most frequently used ET for prevention of variceal rebleeding (VRB) in liver cirrhosis. The Pub-Med, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to February 2017. The primary study outcomes included the incidence of VRB, all-cause mortality, bleeding-related death, and the incidence of post-treatment hepatic encephalopathy (PTE). The odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled for dichotomous variables. Subgroup analyses were performed. Twenty-four studies were eligible and they included 1120 subjects treated with TIPS and 1065 subjects treated with ET. Although there was no significant difference in survival and PTE, TIPS was superior to ET in decreasing the incidence of VRB (OR=0.27; 95% CI, 0.19-0.39, P<0.00001), and decreasing the incidence of bleeding-related death (OR=0.21; 95% CI, 0.13-0.32, P<0.00001). Subgroup analysis found a lower mortality (OR=0.48; 95% CI, 0.23-0.97; P=0.04) without any increased incidence of PTE (OR=1.37; 95% CI, 0.75-2.50; P=0.31) in the studies of a greater proportion (≥40%) of patients with Child-Pugh class C cirrhosis receiving TIPS, and TIPS with covered stent did not increase the risk of PTE compared to ET (OR=1.52, 95% CI =0.82-2.80, P=0.18). It was concluded that TIPS with covered stent might be considered the preferred choice of therapy in patients with severe liver disease for secondary prophylaxis.

Surgical shunts compared with endoscopic sclerotherapy for the treatment of variceal bleeding in adults with portal hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

Portal hypertension is a common complication of chronic liver disease and can cause variceal bleeding which is associated with high mortality. Choices for the treatment of variceal bleeding include surgical shunts and endoscopic sclerotherapy. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of surgical shunts and endoscopic sclerotherapy in treating variceal bleeding due to portal hypertension.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Medline, PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases were searched until 12 February 2015, for relevant randomised control trials. Twenty studies with a total of 1540 participants were included.

PATIENTS

Patients with variceal bleeding due to portal hypertension.

INTERVENTIONS

Surgical shunts compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rates of rebleeding, survival and hepatoencephalopathy, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Pooled data for 17 studies showed that the rate of rebleeding was significantly more frequent with sclerotherapy compared with surgical shunt therapy (OR 3.99, 95% CI 2.98 to 5.33, p<0.001). The sclerotherapy patient group compared with the shunt group was less likely to develop hepatoencephalopathy (15 studies: pooled OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.91, p=0.021) and had shorter hospital stays (pooled mean difference-4.32, 95% CI- 7.97 to -0.66, p=0.021). No significant difference in the survival rate was observed between the two groups (seven studies: OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.62, p=0.964).

CONCLUSION

This analysis indicated that the two types of treatment have similar mortality rates but differed with respect to rebleeding rate, incidence of hepatoencephalopathy and length of hospital stay.

Early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in US patients hospitalized with acute esophageal variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) used as preventive therapy prior to recurrent bleeding has been recommended in patients presenting with acute esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) who are at high risk of further bleeding and death. We investigated the impact of early TIPS on outcomes of US patients hospitalized with EVB from 2000 to 2010.

METHODS

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was queried to identify patients with EVB and decompensated cirrhosis (because early TIPS is recommended only in high-risk patients). The primary outcome was in-hospital death, and secondary outcomes included rebleeding and hepatic encephalopathy. Early preventive TIPS was defined by placement within 3 days of hospitalization for acute EVB after one session of endoscopic therapy. Rescue TIPS was defined as TIPS after two interventions for EVB.

RESULTS

The study included 142 539 patients. From 2000 to 2010, the age-adjusted in-hospital mortality rate decreased 37.2% from 656 per 100 000 to 412 per 100 000 (P <0.01), while early and rescue TIPS increased (0.22% to 0.70%; P < 0.01 and 1.1% to 6.1%; P < 0.01). On multivariate analysis, as compared with no TIPS, early TIPS was associated with decreased inpatient mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.84-0.90) and rebleeding (RR = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.45-0.71) without an increase in hepatic encephalopathy (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.11).

CONCLUSION

Early preventive TIPS in patients with EVB and decompensated cirrhosis was associated with significant in-hospital reductions in rebleeding and mortality without a significant increase in encephalopathy in "real-world" US clinical practice.

Covered TIPS for secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

In the era of bare stents, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is the second-line choice of therapy for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in liver cirrhosis. In the era of covered stents, the role of TIPS should be re-evaluated.

AIM

The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes of covered TIPS versus the traditional first-line therapy (i.e, drug plus endoscopic therapy) for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

All relevant randomized controlled trials were searched via the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Hazard ratios (HRs) and odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and P values were calculated for the cumulative risk and overall risk, respectively. Heterogeneity among studies was also calculated.

RESULTS

Three of 111 retrieved papers were eligible. Among them, the proportion of patients who were switched from drug plus endoscopic therapy to TIPS was 16% to 25%. The risk of bias was relatively low in all included randomized controlled trials. Meta-analyses demonstrated that the covered TIPS group had a similar overall survival (HR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.55-1.28, P = 0.41; OR = 1.00, 95% CI = 0.59-1.69, P = 0.99), a significantly lower risk of variceal rebleeding (HR = 0.30, 95% CI = 0.18-0.48, P < 0.00001; OR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.12-0.46, P < 0.0001), and a similar risk of hepatic encephalopathy (HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 0.72-2.53, P = 0.36; OR = 1.28, 95% CI = 0.54-3.04, P = 0.57). In most of meta-analyses, the heterogeneity among studies was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with drug plus endoscopic therapy, covered TIPS had a significant benefit of preventing from variceal rebleeding, but did not increase the overall survival or risk of hepatic encephalopathy.

Early TIPS versus endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis after management of acute esophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

American College of Gastroenterology and American Association for the Study of Liver Disease guidelines recommend endoscopic and pharmacologic treatment for esophageal variceal bleed. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement is reserved for cases of therapeutic failure. Several studies have suggested improved prevention of rebleeding and improved survival without excess hepatic encephalopathy in patients who receive TIPS within the first 5 days after bleeding (early TIPS). In this meta-analysis, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of early TIPS versus endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis after acute esophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

Pubmed, Medline, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ISI Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared early TIPS to endoscopic therapy. The primary outcome was mortality at 1 year; secondary outcomes were rebleeding and hepatic encephalopathy at 1 year.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials involving 608 cirrhotic patients were identified. Early TIPS was associated with a significant risk reduction in 1-year mortality (RR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96; P = 0.03) and 1-year incidence of variceal rebleeding (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.20-0.40; P < 0.001) without significant heterogeneity among studies (I(2)  = 30% and 47%, respectively). No significant difference in the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy at 1 year was observed (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.72-2.56; P = 0.34); however, there was significant heterogeneity among studies (I(2)  = 68%).

CONCLUSION

TIPS placed within 5 days after a major esophageal variceal hemorrhage is superior to endoscopic treatment in reducing subsequent bleeding. Early TIPS placement is also associated with superior 1-year survival without significantly increasing the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy.

Early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

There is conflicting evidence on the benefit of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS) on the survival of patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB).

AIM

To assess the effect of early TIPSS on patient prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a meta-analysis of trials evaluating early TIPSS in cirrhotic patients with AVB.

RESULTS

Four studies were included. Early TIPSS was associated with fewer deaths [odds ratio (OR)=0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.17-0.83, P=0.02], with moderate heterogeneity between studies (P=0.15, I=44%). Early TIPSS was not significantly associated with fewer deaths among Child-Pugh B patients (OR=0.35, 95% CI=0.10-1.17, P=0.087) nor among Child-Pugh C patients (OR=0.34, 95% CI=0.10-1.11, P=0.074). There was no heterogeneity between studies in the Child-Pugh B analysis (P=0.6, I=0%), but there was a high heterogeneity in the Child-Pugh C analysis (P=0.06, I=60%). Early TIPSS was associated with lower rates of bleeding within 1 year (OR=0.08, 95% CI=0.04-0.17, P<0.001) both among Child-Pugh B patients, (OR=0.15, 95% CI=0.05-0.47, P=0.001) and among Child-Pugh C patients (OR=0.05, 95% CI=0.02-0.15, P<0.001), with no heterogeneity between studies. Early TIPSS was not associated with higher rates of encephalopathy (OR=0.84, 95% CI=0.50-1.42, P=0.5).

CONCLUSION

Cirrhotic patients with AVB treated with early TIPSS had lower death rates and lower rates of clinically significant bleeding within 1 year compared with patients treated without early TIPSS. Additional studies are required to identify the potential risk factors leading to a poor prognosis after early TIPSS in patients with AVB and to determine the impact of the degree of liver failure on the patient's prognosis.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt for Acute Variceal Bleeding: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute variceal bleeding is the most common lethal complication of liver cirrhosis. A meta-analysis was conducted to compare the outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) to those of medical/endoscopic therapy for acute variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for all relevant comparative studies. Odds ratios (OR) and hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI)were pooled for dichotomous and time-dependent variables, respectively. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the type of study design (randomized or nonrandomized studies), source of bleeding (esophageal or gastric varices), type of stent (covered or bare stent), and patient selection (high risk or unselected patients).

RESULTS

Six papers were eligible. TIPS was superior to medical/endoscopic therapy in decreasing the incidence of treatment failure (OR=0.22; 95% CI, 0.11-0.44), improving overall survival (HR=0.55; 95% CI, 0.38-0.812), and decreasing the incidence of bleeding-related death (OR=0.19; 95% CI, 0.06-0.59). Although TIPS did not significantly decrease the incidence of rebleeding (OR=0.27; 95% CI, 0.06-1.29), it became significantly greater in the subgroup meta-analyses of randomized studies (OR=0.09; 95% CI, 0.03-0.32) than in those of nonrandomized studies (OR=0.76; 95% CI, 0.40-1.45; subgroup difference, P=0.003), and in the subgroup meta-analyses of studies including high-risk patients (OR=0.06; 95% CI, 0.01-0.23) than in those including low-risk patients (OR=0.83; 95% CI, 0.44-1.56; subgroup difference, P=0.0007). In addition, TIPS did not significantly increase the incidence of posttreatment hepatic encephalopathy (OR=1.37; 95% CI, 0.63-2.99).

CONCLUSIONS

With the exception of the benefit of prevention from treatment failure, TIPS with covered stents might improve the overall survival of high-risk patients with acute variceal bleeding.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for acute variceal gastrointestinal bleeding: Indications, techniques and outcomes

Acute variceal bleeding is a life-threatening condition that requires a multidisciplinary approach for effective therapy. The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure is a minimally invasive image-guided intervention used for secondary prevention of bleeding and as salvage therapy in acute bleeding. Emergency TIPS should be considered early in patients with refractory variceal bleeding once medical treatment and endoscopic sclerotherapy fail, before the clinical condition worsens. Furthermore, admission to specialized centers is mandatory in such a setting and regional protocols are essential to be organized effectively. This procedure involves establishment of a direct pathway between the hepatic veins and the portal veins to decompress the portal venous hypertension that is the source of the patient's bleeding. The procedure is technically challenging, especially in critically ill patients, and has a mortality of 30%-50% in the emergency setting, but has an effectiveness greater than 90% in controlling bleeding from gastro-esophageal varices. This review focuses on the role of TIPS in the setting of variceal bleeding, with emphasis on current indications and techniques for TIPS creation, TIPS clinical outcomes, and the role of adjuvant embolization of varices.

Advanced Cirrhosis Combined with Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Randomized Trial of TIPS versus Endoscopic Band Ligation Plus Propranolol for the Prevention of Recurrent Esophageal Variceal Bleeding

PURPOSE

To compare transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement with or without variceal embolization with endoscopic band ligation (EBL) plus propranolol in preventing recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with advanced cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The present randomized controlled trial was approved by the ethics committee board of West China Hospital. Written informed consent was obtained from each patient. Between January 2010 and December 2012, 73 patients were randomly allocated to receive TIPS (n = 37) or EBL plus propranolol (n = 36). The comparisons of recurrent variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, and survival rates were based on the Kaplan-Meier method and were compared using the log-rank test.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 22.8 months ± 7.7(standard deviation) in the TIPS group and 20.9 months ± 8.9 in the EBL group. The 2-year probability of remaining free of recurrent variceal bleeding was higher in the TIPS group (77.8%) than in the EBL group (42.9%) (P = .002). Overall recanalization was achieved in 24 (64.9%) patients from the TIPS group and seven (19.4%) patients from the EBL group. The hepatic encephalopathy rates exhibited no significant differences between the two groups (P = .53). The 1- and 2-year probability of survival was 86.5% and 72.9%, respectively, in the TIPS group and 83.3% and 57.2%, respectively, in the EBL group, with no significant difference (P = .23).

CONCLUSION

TIPS was more effective than EBL plus propranolol in preventing recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with advanced cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis and did not increase the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy. Survival was similar in both groups.

Nonendoscopic management strategies for acute esophagogastric variceal bleeding

Acute variceal bleeding is a potentially life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. Management consists of emergent hemostasis, therapy directed at hemodynamic resuscitation, protection of the airway, and prevention and treatment of complications including prophylactic use of antibiotics. Endoscopic treatment remains the mainstay in the management of acute variceal bleeding in combination with pharmacotherapy aimed at reducing portal pressure. This article intends to highlight only the current nonendoscopic treatment approaches for control of acute variceal bleeding.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an established procedure for the complications of portal hypertension. The largest body of evidence for its use has been supported for recurrent or refractory variceal bleeding and refractory ascites. Its use has also been advocated for acute variceal bleed, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatorenal syndrome. With the replacement of bare metal stents with polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents, shunt patency has improved dramatically, thus, improving outcomes. Therefore, reassessment of its utility, management of its complications, and understanding of various TIPS techniques is important.

Shunting branch of portal vein and stent position predict survival after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

AIM

To evaluate the effect of the shunting branch of the portal vein (PV) (left or right) and the initial stent position (optimal or suboptimal) of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 307 consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent TIPS placement for variceal bleeding from March 2001 to July 2010 at our center. The left PV was used in 221 patients and the right PV in the remaining 86 patients. And, 224 and 83 patients have optimal stent position and sub-optimal stent positions, respectively. The patients were followed until October 2011 or their death. Hepatic encephalopathy, shunt dysfunction, and survival were evaluated as outcomes. The difference between the groups was compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. A Cox regression model was employed to evaluate the predictors.

RESULTS

Among the patients who underwent TIPS to the left PV, the risk of hepatic encephalopathy (P = 0.002) and mortality were lower (P < 0.001) compared to those to the right PV. Patients who underwent TIPS with optimal initial stent position had a higher primary patency (P < 0.001) and better survival (P = 0.006) than those with suboptimal initial stent position. The shunting branch of the portal vein and the initial stent position were independent predictors of hepatic encephalopathy and shunt dysfunction after TIPS, respectively. And, both were independent predictors of survival.

CONCLUSION

TIPS placed to the left portal vein with optimal stent position may reduce the risk of hepatic encephalopathy and improve the primary patency rates, thereby prolonging survival.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for the management of acute variceal hemorrhage

Acute variceal hemorrhage, a life-threatening condition that requires a multidisciplinary approach for effective therapy, is defined as visible bleeding from an esophageal or gastric varix at the time of endoscopy, the presence of large esophageal varices with recent stigmata of bleeding, or fresh blood visible in the stomach with no other source of bleeding identified. Transfusion of blood products, pharmacological treatments and early endoscopic therapy are often effective; however, if primary hemostasis cannot be obtained or if uncontrollable early rebleeding occurs, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is recommended as rescue treatment. The TIPS represents a major advance in the treatment of complications of portal hypertension. Acute variceal hemorrhage that is poorly controlled with endoscopic therapy is generally well controlled with TIPS, which has a 90% to 100% success rate. However, TIPS is associated with a mortality of 30% to 50% in such a setting. Emergency TIPS should be considered early in patients with refractory variceal bleeding once medical treatment and endoscopic sclerotherapy failure, before the clinical condition worsens. Furthermore, admission to specialized centers is mandatory in such a setting and regional protocols are essential to be organized effectively. This review article discusses initial management and then focuses on the specific role of TIPS as a primary therapy to control acute variceal hemorrhage, particularly as a rescue therapy following failure of endoscopic approaches.

Portal hypertension and gastrointestinal bleeding: Diagnosis, prevention and management

Bleeding from esophageal varices is a life threatening complication of portal hypertension. Primary prevention of bleeding in patients at risk for a first bleeding episode is therefore a major goal. Medical prophylaxis consists of non-selective beta-blockers like propranolol or carvedilol. Variceal endoscopic band ligation is equally effective but procedure related morbidity is a drawback of the method. Therapy of acute bleeding is based on three strategies: vasopressor drugs like terlipressin, antibiotics and endoscopic therapy. In refractory bleeding, self-expandable stents offer an option for bridging to definite treatments like transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Treatment of bleeding from gastric varices depends on vasopressor drugs and on injection of varices with cyanoacrylate. Strategies for primary or secondary prevention are based on non-selective beta-blockers but data from large clinical trials is lacking. Therapy of refractory bleeding relies on shunt-procedures like TIPS. Bleeding from ectopic varices, portal hypertensive gastropathy and gastric antral vascular ectasia-syndrome is less common. Possible medical and endoscopic treatment options are discussed.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Patients with Portal Hypertension

Gastrointestinal bleeding related to portal hypertension is a serious complication in patients with liver cirrhosis. Most patients bleed from esophageal or gastric varices, but bleeding from ectopic varices or portal hypertensive gastropathy is also possible. The management of acute bleeding has changed over the last years. Patients are managed with a combination of endoscopic and pharmacologic treatment. The endoscopic treatment of choice for esophageal variceal bleeding is variceal band ligation. Bleeding from gastric varices is treated by injection with cyanoacrylate. Treatment with vasoactive drugs as well as antibiotic treatment is started before or at the time point of endoscopy. The first-line treatment for primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding is nonselective beta blockers. Pharmacologic therapy is recommended for most patients; band ligation is an alternative in patients with contraindications for or intolerability of beta blockers. Treatment options for secondary prophylaxis include variceal band ligation, beta blockers, a combination of nitrates and beta blockers, and combination of band ligation and pharmacologic treatment. A clear superiority of one treatment over the other has not been shown. Bleeding from portal hypertensive gastropathy or ectopic varices is less common. Treatment options include beta blocker therapy, injection therapy, and interventional radiology.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) increases the risk of variceal rebleeding in liver cirrhosis. However, the strategy for preventing variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with PVT has not been explored. This study aims to evaluate whether the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) or conventional therapy is preferable for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in liver cirrhosis patients with PVT.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a randomised controlled trial comparing the safety and efficacy of TIPS versus conventional therapy (ie, endoscopic therapy combined with non-selective β-blockers and anticoagulants) for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with non-tumoral PVT. A total of 50 cirrhotic patients with PVT (thrombus >50% of portal vein lumen occupancy) and a history of variceal bleeding will be stratified according to the Child-Pugh class and degree of PVT, and randomised into the TIPS and conventional therapy groups. The primary objective was to compare the incidence of variceal rebleeding between the two groups. The secondary objectives were to compare the overall mortality, variceal rebleeding-related mortality, portal vein recanalisation and complications between the two groups, and to observe the progression of PVT in patients without portal vein recanalisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the ethics committee of Xijing hospital (No. 20110224-5), and was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01326949). All participants give written informed consent. The first patient was recruited into our study on 4 June 2011. A total of 29 patients were recruited through 5 March 2013 (14 and 15 patients assigned to the TIPS and conventional therapy groups, respectively). If TIPS is superior to conventional therapy for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with PVT, TIPS might be recommended as the first-line therapy in such patients. But a small sample size potentially limits the generalisation of our conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 29 March 2011. The trial registration number is NCT01326949.

TRIAL STATUS

The first patient was recruited into our study on 4 June 2011. A total of 29 patients were recruited through 5 March 2013 (14 and 15 patients assigned to the TIPS and conventional therapy groups, respectively).

Hepatic encephalopathy after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in patients with recurrent variceal hemorrhage

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence and predictors of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and endoscopic therapy (ET) in the elective treatment of recurrent variceal hemorrhage. Methods. Seventy patients were treated with elective TIPS and fifty-six patients with ET. Median observation time was 46.28 months in the TIPS group and 42.31 months in the ET group. Results. 30 patients (42.8%) developed clinically evident portosystemic encephalopathy in TIPS group and 20 patients (35.6%) in ET group. The difference between the groups was not statistically significant (P = 0.542; χ (2) test). The incidence of new or worsening portosystemic encephalopathy was 24.3% in TIPS group and 10.7% in ET group. Multivariate analysis showed that ET treatment (P = 0.031), age of >65 years (P = 0.022), pre-existing HE (P = 0.045), and Child's class C (P = 0.051) values were independent predictors for the occurrence of HE. Conclusions. Procedure-related HE is a complication in a minority of patients treated with TIPS or ET. Patients with increased age, preexisting HE, and higher Child-Pugh score should be carefully observed after TIPS procedure because the risk of post-TIPS HE in these patients is higher.

A case-control study of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunts for patients admitted to intensive care following variceal bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Variceal bleeding has a 6-week mortality of 20%. Recent evidence suggests that early covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunts (TIPSS) can improve outcomes following a variceal bleed in selected patients. We aim to assess the outcomes following the insertion of covered TIPSS in a real-life intensive care setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective matched cohort study of all patients referred for TIPSS with variceal bleeding admitted to intensive care (2007-2009). Patients were matched with others admitted to intensive therapy unit following a variceal bleed but did not proceed to TIPSS. All TIPSS procedures were carried out using polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients [mean age 55.2 years; mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)=14.0; and median follow-up 458 days] were assessed. Nineteen underwent TIPSS and were well matched to the controls. All patients received terlipressin and antibiotics and 86% had active bleeding at endoscopy. Indication for TIPSS was salvage therapy (47%), rebleeding after day 5 (11%) and as secondary prophylaxis (42%). There was 34% all-cause inpatient mortality. The TIPSS group had lower mortality than the non-TIPSS group at 6 weeks (10.5 vs. 47.4%, P<0.05) that persisted at 1 year (21.1 vs. 52.6%, P<0.05). Multivariate analysis indicated MELD [HR 1.131, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.018-1.257] and TIPSS (HR 0.301, 95% CI 0.091-0.995) as significant predictors of mortality (P<0.05). TIPSS was found to significantly reduce the incidence of failure to control bleeding and rebleeding (HR 0.120, 95% CI 0.015-0.978, P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with recent severe variceal bleeding admitted to intensive care have significantly better outcomes following covered TIPSS insertion. These findings should be validated in randomized-controlled trials.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) versus laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) plus preoperative endoscopic varices ligation (EVL) in the treatment of recurrent variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to compare elective transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) plus preoperative endoscopic varices ligation (EVL) in their efficacy in preventing recurrent bleeding and improving the long-term liver function in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

METHODS

Between January 2009 and March 2012, we enrolled 83 patients (55 with TIPS, defined as the TIPS group, and 28 with LS plus preoperative EVL, defined as the LS group) with portal hypertension and a history of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding resulting from liver cirrhosis. The clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between the two treatment groups with respect to the patients' characteristics and preoperative variables. Within 30 days after surgery, one patient in the TIPS group died of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, whereas no patient in the LS group died. Complications occurred in 14 patients in the TIPS group, which included rebleeding, encephalopathy, ascites, bleeding from a pseudoaneurysm of the thoracoabdominal aorta, and pulmonary infection, compared with 5 patients in the LS group, which included pulmonary effusion, pancreatic leakage, and portal vein thrombosis. During a mean follow-up of 13.6 months in the TIPS group and 12.3 months in the LS group, the actuarial survival was 85.5 % in the TIPS group versus 100 % in the LS group. The long-term complications included rebleeding and encephalopathy in the TIPS group.

CONCLUSIONS

LS plus EVL was superior to TIPS in the prevention of gastroesophageal variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients. This treatment was associated with a low rate of portosystemic encephalopathy and improvements in the long-term liver function.

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an update

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to review the indications, outcomes, complications, patient selection, and technical aspects of creating a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

CONCLUSION

The best available evidence supports the use of TIPS in secondary prevention of variceal bleeding and in refractory ascites, although TIPS is also commonly used for other indications such as Budd-Chiari syndrome, hepatic hydrothorax, and acute variceal hemorrhage. The TIPS procedure was revolutionized by the introduction of covered stents, which dramatically improved long-term shunt patency.

Hepatic encephalopathy after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been used for more than 20 years to treat some of the complications of portal hypertension. When TIPS was initially proposed, it was claimed that the optimal calibration of the shunt could allow an adequate reduction of portal hypertension, avoiding, at the same time, the occurrence of hepatic encephalopathy (HE), a neurologic syndrome. However, several clinical observations have shown that HE occurred rather frequently after TIPS, and HE has become an important issue to be taken into consideration in TIPS candidates and a problem to be faced after the procedure.

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in the treatment of portal hypertension: current status

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) represents a major advance in the treatment of complications of portal hypertension. Technical improvements and increased experience over the past 24 years led to improved clinical results and a better definition of the indications for TIPS. Randomized clinical trials indicate that the TIPS procedure is not a first-line therapy for variceal bleeding, but can be used when medical treatment fails, both in the acute situation or to prevent variceal rebleeding. The role of TIPS to treat refractory ascites is probably more justified to improve the quality of life rather than to improve survival, except for patients with preserved liver function. It can be helpful for hepatic hydrothorax and can reverse hepatorenal syndrome in selected cases. It is a good treatment for Budd Chiari syndrome uncontrollable by medical treatment. Careful selection of patients is mandatory before TIPS, and clinical followup is essential to detect and treat complications that may result from TIPS stenosis (which can be prevented by using covered stents) and chronic encephalopathy (which may in severe cases justify reduction or occlusion of the shunt). A multidisciplinary approach, including the resources for liver transplantation, is always required to treat these patients.

Using transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts for complications of cirrhosis

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) decompresses the portal venous system. TIPS has been used to manage the complications of portal hypertension in cirrhosis, including variceal hemorrhage and refractory ascites. The uncoated TIPS stents are limited by stent stenosis; however, the introduction of coated stents has decreased this. With the introduction of coated stents, we must reevaluate the utility of TIPS in the management of complications of portal hypertension.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts in patients with hepatic malignancy

Since its first clinical application in 1988, the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has emerged as a safe and effective means of managing patients with morbid portal hypertension. Despite the considerable body of literature on TIPS, portal decompression in patients with malignancy has not been sufficiently examined. These patients typically experience sequelae of portal hypertension that requires palliation. The purpose of this article is to review the reported experience with TIPS in patients with malignancy.

Management of varices in cirrhosis

INTRODUCTION

Acute variceal bleeding is a medical emergency and one of the main causes of mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Timely and effective treatment of the acute bleeding episode results in increased survival, and appropriate prophylactic treatment can prevent bleeding or rebleeding from varices.

AREAS COVERED

We discuss the prevention of development and growth of varices, the primary and secondary prophylaxis of bleeding, the treatment of acute bleeding, and the management of gastric varices. We systematically reviewed studies, without time limits, identified through Medline and searches of reference lists, and provide an overview of the evidence underlying the -treatment options in the management of varices in cirrhosis.

EXPERT OPINION

The management of variceal hemorrhage relies on nonspecific interventions (e.g., adequate fluid resuscitation, airway protection) and on specific interventions. These are routine prophylactic antibiotics, vasoactive drugs and endoscopic treatment. Procedures such as the placement of a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube or a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) can be lifesaving. The primary and secondary prophylaxis of bleeding is based on nonselective beta-blockers and endoscopy, even though TIPS or, less frequently, surgery have a role in selected cases.

Role of TIPS in Improving Survival of Patients with Decompensated Liver Disease

Liver cirrhosis is associated with higher morbidity and reduced survival with appearance of portal hypertension and resultant decompensation. Portal decompression plays a key role in improving survival in these patients. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts are known to be efficacious in reducing portal venous pressure and control of complications such as variceal bleeding and ascites. However, they have been associated with significant problems such as poor shunt durability, increased encephalopathy, and unchanged survival when compared with conservative treatment options. The last decade has seen a significant improvement in these complications, with introduction of covered stents, better selection of patients, and clearer understanding of procedural end-points. Use of TIPS early in the period of decompensation also appears promising in further improvement of survival of cirrhotic patients.

Direct costs of care in a randomized controlled trial of endoscopic sclerotherapy versus emergency portacaval shunt for bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis--Part 4

BACKGROUND

Emergency treatment of bleeding esophageal varices (BEV) in cirrhotic patients is of prime importance because of the high mortality rate surrounding the episode of acute bleeding. Nevertheless, there is a paucity of randomized controlled trials of emergency surgical therapy and no reports of the costs of any of the widely used forms of emergency treatment. The important issue of direct costs of care was examined in a randomized controlled trial that compared endoscopic sclerotherapy (EST) to emergency portacaval shunt (EPCS).

METHODS

Two hundred eleven unselected consecutive patients with ultimately biopsy-proven cirrhosis and endoscopically proven acute BEV were randomized to EST (n = 106) or EPCS (n = 105). Diagnostic workup was completed, and EST or EPCS was initiated within 8 h. Criteria for failure of EST or EPCS were clearly defined, and crossover rescue treatment was applied, when primary therapy failed. Ninety-six percent of patients underwent more than 10 years follow-up, or until death. Complete charges for all aspects of care were obtained continuously for more than 10 years.

RESULTS

Direct charges for all aspects of care were significantly lower in patients treated by EPCS than in patients treated by emergency EST followed by long-term repetitive sclerotherapy. Charges per patient, per year of treatment, and per year in each child's risk class were significantly lower in patients randomized to EPCS. Charges in patients who failed endoscopic sclerotherapy and underwent a rescue portacaval shunt were significantly higher than the charges in both the unshunted sclerotherapy patients and the patients randomized to EPCS. This result was particularly noteworthy given the widespread practice of using surgical portacaval shunt as rescue treatment only when all other forms of therapy have failed.

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized controlled trial of emergency treatment of acute BEV, EPCS was significantly superior to EST with regard to direct costs of care as reflected in charges for care as well as in survival rate, control of bleeding, and incidence of portal-systemic encephalopathy. These results provide support for the use of EPCS as a first line of emergency treatment of BEV in cirrhosis.

Emerging issues in the use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for management of portal hypertension: time to update the guidelines?

Since its first introduction in the 1980s, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt has played an increasingly important role in the management and treatment of the complications of portal hypertension. In 2005, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases published the Practice Guidelines for the use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in the management of portal hypertension. Since then, technical advances and new interesting data on transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt have been presented in the literature. The present review focus on the applications of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and examines more recent studies on this topic; the current guidelines on the use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are also discussed. From the data presented in the most recent publications, it has become increasingly clear that the recommendations stemming from the current guidelines need to be reviewed and updated in several points. Changes in the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases Practice Guidelines are needed for both common indications (variceal bleeding and refractory ascites) as well as uncommon ones (i.e., Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal cavernoma). In addition, a relevant technical advance has been the introduction of the polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents, which greatly improved the patency and clinical efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. Consequently, new studies are required to re-assess the role of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt performed with new covered stents as compared with other strategies in the management of portal hypertension.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the elective treatment of recurrent variceal bleeding

The present study was designed to compare elective transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) and endoscopic sclerotherapy (EST) in terms of their efficacy in preventing recurrent bleeding from gastro-oesophageal varices in patients with advanced liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Of 96 patients with at least three gastro-oesophageal variceal rebleeds, 50 were treated with elective TIPS and 46 with EST. Recurrent variceal bleeding was significantly more frequent in patients receiving EST treatment compared with those receiving TIPS (45.7% versus 6.3%, respectively). Cumulative 1- and 4-year survival in the TIPS group was 83.0% and 73.5%, respectively, compared with 69.8% and 39.8% in the EST group, respectively. The rate of portosystemic encephalopathy was 33.3% in the TIPS group and 37.0% in the EST group. Elective TIPS was more effective than EST in the prevention of gastro-oesophageal variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients, it improved survival and it was associated with a similar rate of portosystemic encephalopathy.

Interventional radiology in the management of portal hypertension

From being a mere (though important) diagnostic tool, radiology has evolved to become an integral part of therapy in portal hypertension today. Various procedures are currently available, the choice depending on the etiology and location of disease, the pathoanatomy, and the symptomatology. The main aim of any procedure is to reduce the portal pressure by either direct or indirect methods. This can be achieved with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), recanalization of the hepatic vein outflow, recanalization of the portal vein and its tributaries, recanalization of dysfunctional portosystemic shunts, partial splenic embolization, and embolization of arterioportal shunts. When any of these procedures cannot be performed due to anatomical or physiological reasons, the symptoms can often be controlled effectively with embolization of varices or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration of varices (BRTO). This article briefly describes the procedures, their results, and their current status in the treatment of portal hypertension.

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)

The creation of an intrahepatic portosystemic shunt via a transjugular approach (TIPS) is an interventional radiological procedure used to treat the complications of portal hypertension. TIPS insertion is principally indicated to prevent or arrest variceal bleeding when medical or endoscopic treatments fail, and in the management refractory ascites. This review discusses the development and execution of the technique, with focus on its clinical efficacy. Patient selection, imaging surveillance, revision techniques, and complications are also discussed.

Percutaneous transportal sclerotherapy with N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate for gastric varices: technique and clinical efficacy

Objective

This study was deigned to evaluate the technique and clinical efficacy of the use of percutaneous transportal sclerotherapy with N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (NBCA) for patients with gastric varices.

Materials and Methods

Seven patients were treated by transportal sclerotherapy with the use of NBCA. For transportal sclerotherapy, portal vein catheterization was performed with a 6-Fr sheath by the transhepatic approach. A 5-Fr catheter was introduced into the afferent gastric vein and a microcatheter was advanced through the 5-Fr catheter into the varices. NBCA was injected through the microcatheter in the varices by use of the continuous single-column injection technique. After the procedure, postcontrast computed tomography (CT) was performed on the next day and then every six months. Gastroendoscopy was performed at one week, three months, and then every six months after the procedure.

Results

The technical success rate of the procedure was 88%. In six patients, gastric varices were successfully obliterated with 1-8 mL (mean, 5.4 mL) of a NBCA-Lipiodol mixture injected via a microcatheter. No complications related to the procedure were encountered. As seen on the follow-up endoscopy and CT imaging performed after six months, the presence of gastric varcies was not seen in any of the patients after treatment with the NBCA-Lipiodol mixture and the use of microcoils. Recurrence of gastric varices was not observed during the follow-up period. Worsening of esophageal varices occurred in four patients after transportal sclerotherapy. The serum albumin level increased, the ammonia level decreased and the prothrombin time increased at six months after the procedure (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Percutaneous transportal sclerotherapy with NBCA is useful to obliterate gastric varices if it is not possible to perform balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration.