Transjugular intrahepatic portasystemic shunt vs surgical shunt in good-risk cirrhotic patients: a case-control comparison

The Portosystemic Shunt for the Control of Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Patients: Past and Present

Based on an experience of more than 50 years in the treatment of portal hypertension (PHT), the authors review and analyze the evolution of the surgical portocaval shunt (PCS). We would like to provide an insight into the past of PCS, in order to compare it with the current state of the treatment of PHT complications. As a landmark of the past, we shall present statistics of more than 500 cases of PHT operated between 1968 and 1983. From this group, 238 patients underwent surgical portocaval shunting during a fifteen-year period. The behavior of the portal hemodynamics following PCS was studied and the postoperative decrease in portal pressure (PP), as well as the residual PP, were recorded. The portal manometric determinations were made by electronic recordings using the Hellige device and direct intraoperative recordings through the catheterization of a ramus in the portal area. The results of PCS are superposable, in terms of hemodynamic efficiency, with those of the intrahepatic shunt (TIPS-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt). The authors discuss the current place of PCS, in obvious decline in comparison with the situation 50 years ago. The current methods of controlling variceal bleeding represent obvious progress. PCS remains with very limited indications, in specific situations when the other therapeutic methods have failed or are not recommended.

Portosystemic shunt surgery in the era of TIPS: imaging-based planning of the surgical approach

PURPOSE

With the spread of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS), portosystemic shunt surgery (PSSS) has decreased and leaves more complex patients with great demands for accurate preoperative planning. The aim was to evaluate the role of imaging for predicting the most suitable PSSS approach.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty-four patients who underwent PSSS (2002 to 2013) were examined by contrast-enhanced CT (n = 33) and/or MRI (n = 15) prior to surgery. Imaging was analyzed independently by two observers (O1 and O2) with different levels of experience (O1 > O2). They recommended two shunting techniques (vessels and anastomotic variant) for each patient and ranked them according to their appropriateness and complexity. Findings were compared with the actually performed shunt procedure and its outcome.

RESULTS

The first two choices taken together covered the performed PSSS regarding vessels in 88%/100% (CT/MRI, O1) and 76%/73% (O2); and vessels + anastomosis in 79%/73% (O1) and 67%/60% (O2). The prediction of complex surgical procedures (resection of interposing structures, additional thrombectomy, use of a collateral vessel, and use of a graft interposition) was confirmed in 87%, resulting in 80% sensitivity and 96% specificity. Larger shunt vessel distances were associated with therapy failure (p = 0.030) and a vessel distance of ≥ 20 mm was identified as optimal cutoff, in which a graft interposition was used. There was no significant difference between MRI and CT in predicting the intraoperative decisions (p = 0.294 to 1.000).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative imaging and an experienced radiologist can guide surgeons in PSSS. CT and MRI provide the information necessary to identify technically feasible variants and complicating factors.

Update on Shunt Surgery

Background

Bleeding from esophagogastric varices is a life-threatening complication from portal hypertension. It occurs in 15% of patients and has a mortality rate of 20-35%.

Summary

The primary therapy for variceal bleeding is medical. In cases of recurrent bleeding, a definitive therapy is required. In cases of parenchymal decompensation, liver transplantation is the causal therapy, but if liver function is preserved, portal decompression is the therapy of choice. The use of the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has achieved widespread acceptance, although evidence for surgical shunts is comparable or better in patients with good hepatic reserve. The type of surgical shunt depends on the patent veins of the portomesenteric system. If total occlusion is present, a devascularization procedure might be indicated.

Key Messages

Therapy, taking into account liver function, morphology of the portovenous system, and imminent liver transplantation, should be performed by an interdisciplinary team of gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and gastrointestinal surgeons.

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.

Surgical portosystemic shunts versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Variceal haemorrhage that is refractory or recurs after pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy requires a portal decompression shunt (either surgical shunts or radiologic shunt, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)). TIPS has become the shunt of choice; however, is it the preferred option? This review assesses evidence for the comparisons of surgical portosystemic shunts versus TIPS for variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. We also searched on-line trial registries, reference lists of relevant articles, and proceedings of relevant associations for trials that met the inclusion criteria for this review (date of search 8 March 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical portosystemic shunts versus TIPS for the treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data using methodological standards expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias according to domains and risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four randomised clinical trials including 496 adult participants diagnosed with variceal haemorrhage due to cirrhotic portal hypertension. The overall risk of bias in all the trials was judged at high risk. All the trials were conducted in the United States of America (USA). Two of the trials randomised participants to selective surgical shunts versus TIPS. The other two trials randomised participants to non-selective surgical shunts versus TIPS. The diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was by clinical and laboratory findings. We are uncertain whether there is a difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days between surgical portosystemic shunts compared with TIPS (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 1.99; participants = 496; studies = 4). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in encephalopathy between surgical shunts compared with TIPS (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.16; participants = 496; studies = 4). We found evidence suggesting an increase in the occurrence of the following harms in the TIPS group compared with surgical shunts: all-cause mortality at five years (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90; participants = 496; studies = 4); variceal rebleeding (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; participants = 496; studies = 4); reinterventions (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.28; participants = 496; studies = 4); and shunt occlusion (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.51; participants = 496; studies = 4). We could not perform an analysis of health-related quality of life but available evidence appear to suggest improved health-related quality of life in people who received surgical shunt compared with TIPS. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all-cause mortality at 30 days and five years, irreversible shunt occlusion, and encephalopathy to very low because of high risk of bias (due to lack of blinding); inconsistency (due to heterogeneity); imprecision (due to small sample sizes of the individual trials and few events); and publication bias (few trials reporting outcomes). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for variceal rebleeding and reintervention to very low because of high risk of bias (due to lack of blinding); imprecision (due to small sample sizes of the individual trials and few events); and publication bias (few trials reporting outcomes). The small sample sizes and few events did not allow us to produce meaningful trial sequential monitoring boundaries, suggesting plausible random errors in our estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence suggesting that surgical portosystemic shunts may have benefit over TIPS for treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension. Given the very low-certainty of the available evidence and risks of random errors in our analyses, we have very little confidence in our review findings.

Effects of a Long-Acting Formulation of Octreotide on Patients with Portal Hypertension

Objective

This study aimed to determine whether the treatment of a long-acting formulation of octreotide (OCT-LAR) exerted a similar effect on improving the prognosis of patients with portal hypertension compared with placement of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs).

Methods

A total of 24 patients with portal hypertension who underwent TIPS placement or OCT-LAR treatment from January 2010 to January 2015 were reviewed. Hemodynamic studies, biological values, live functions, and treatment complications before and during the treatment were evaluated.

Results

Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between two groups. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) was improved in OCT-LAR groups (15.9 ± 2.4 to 12.8 ± 1.6 mmHg). Both groups showed a slight decrease in endothelin-1 (ET-1) and urotensin II and a slight increase in oxide metabolite (NOx) concentrations with no significant difference. Aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase increased one week after TIPS placement when they improved in the OCT-LAR treatment group. The complications of OCT-LAR treatment were minor and transient. However, one patient who received TIPS placement presented procedure-related complications and required rehospitalization, and 2 patients had developed hepatic encephalopathy during the follow-up period.

Conclusion

Prolonged administration of OCT-LAR exerted a virtually similar effect on improving hemodynamic parameters and liver function in patients with portal hypertension compared with placement of TIPS, with no apparent serious adverse effects.

Portal Hypertension Over the Last 25 Years: Where Did It Go?

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension has seemingly vanished from surgery; this study was undertaken to determine where it has gone.

STUDY DESIGN

Data from the Agency for Health Care Administration for 33,166,201 hospital inpatients in Florida for the periods 1988 to 1992, 1998 to 2002, and 2008 to 2012 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Admissions with a diagnosis of portal hypertension dramatically increased: 5,473 patients from 1988 to 1992, 7,366 patients from 1998 to 2002, and 36,554 patients from 2008 to 2012. Endoscopic treatment of esophageal varices also dramatically increased. The number of decompressive shunts placed nominally increased, but application of endoscopic therapy increased significantly faster than the application of decompressive shunts (p < 0.0001). The percentage of patients who underwent shunting dramatically and significantly decreased (p < 0.0001), and surgeons undertook proportionally fewer shunts (42% in 1992 to 4% in 2012; p < 0.0001). For patients with a diagnosis of portal hypertension, in-hospital mortality progressively decreased, from 9% in 1988 to 1992 to 3% in 2008 to 2012 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In the state of Florida, over 25 years, there has been a 7-fold increase in the number of patients admitted with a diagnosis of portal hypertension, with a 65% reduction of in-hospital mortality. Application of endoscopic treatment of varices has increased dramatically. Decompressive shunts are applied to an ever-decreasing percentage of patients, and when applied, are now routinely undertaken by nonsurgeons. Therefore, portal hypertension has disappeared from the purview of surgery and has migrated toward the world of medical and endoscopic therapy, probably never to return.

Portal hypertensive gastropathy with a focus on management

Portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) is a painless condition of gastric mucosal ectasia and impaired mucosal defense, commonly seen in patients with elevated portal pressures. While it is typically asymptomatic and incidentally discovered on upper endoscopy, acute and chronic bleeding may occur. There are no definitive recommendations for treatment of asymptomatic PHG. Non-selective β-blockers represent the mainstay of therapy for chronic bleeding, while somatostatin and vasopressin and their derivatives may be used in conjunction with supportive measures for acute bleeding. Salvage therapy with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt or rarely surgical shunt is appropriate when medical management fails. The role of endoscopic therapy for PHG is controversial. Liver transplantation should be considered as a final resort in cases of refractory bleeding due to PHG.

Twenty-five years after the first TIPS in Spain

The incorporation, 25 years ago, of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting, better known by the acronym TIPS, represents an indisputable improvement in the treatment and management of patients with symptoms due to portal hypertension. This article discusses the origins of the technique and the technical innovations that have been progressively added through the years. The implantation of coated stents, which protect the stent from processes in the parenchymal track that can lead to stenosis, have helped ensure long-term patency, thus reducing the need for reintervention. Solid evidence from valuable publications has situated TIPS at the forefront of the treatment options in a wide variety of clinical situations associated with portal hypertension.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus surgical shunting in the management of portal hypertension

Background:

The purpose of this article was to clarify the optimal management concerning transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs) and surgical shunting in treating portal hypertension.

Methods:

All databases, including CBM, CNKI, WFPD, Medline, EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane up to February 2014, were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TIPS with surgical shunting. Four RCTs, which were extracted by two independent investigators and were evaluated in postoperative complications, mortality, 2- and 5-year survival, hospital stay, operating time and hospitalization charges.

Results:

The morbidity in variceal rehemorrhage was significantly higher in TIPS than in surgical shunts (odds ratio [OR] = 7.45, 95% confidence interval[CI]: (3.93–14.15), P < 0.00001), the same outcomes were seen in shunt stenosis (OR = 20.01, 95% CI: (6.67–59.99), P < 0.000001) and in hepatic encephalopathy (OR = 2.50, 95% CI: (1.63–3.84), P < 0.0001). Significantly better 2-year survival (OR = 0.66; 95% CI: (0.44–0.98), P = 0.04) and 5-year survival (OR = 0.44; 95% CI: (0.30–0.66), P < 0.00001) were seen in patients undergoing surgical shunting compared with TIPS.

Conclusions:

Compared with TIPS, postoperative complications and survival after surgical shunting were superior for patients with portal hypertension. Application of surgical shunting was recommended for patients rather than TIPS.

Clinical Management of Chronic Portal/Mesenteric Vein Thrombosis: The Surgeon's Point of View

BACKGROUND

Bleeding from esophageal varices is a life-threatening complication of chronic portal hypertension (PH), occuring in 15% of patients with a mortality rate between 20 and 35%.

METHODS

Based on a literature review and personal experience in the therapy of PH, we recommend a therapy strategy for the secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in PH.

RESULTS

The main causes for PH in western countries are alcoholic/viral liver cirrhosis and extrahepatic portal/mesenteric vein occlusion, mainly caused by myeloproliferative neoplasms or hypercoagulability syndromes. The primary therapy is medical; however, when recurrent bleeding occurs, a definitive therapy is required. In the case of parenchymal decompensation, liver transplantation is the causal therapy, but in case of good hepatic reserve or without underlying liver disease, a portal decompressive therapy is necessary. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt has achieved a widespread acceptance, although evidence is comparable with or better for surgical shunting procedures in patients with good liver function. The type of surgical shunt should be chosen depending on the patent veins of the portovenous system and the personal expertise.

CONCLUSION

The therapy decision should be based on liver function, morphology of the portovenous system, and imminent liver transplantation and should be made by an interdisciplinary team of gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and visceral surgeons.

Outcomes of TIPS for Treatment of Gastroesophageal Variceal Hemorrhage

Variceal hemorrhage is a life-threatening complication of cirrhosis that requires a multidisciplinary approach to management. 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 hemorrhage. This review focuses on the role of TIPS in the setting of variceal hemorrhage, with emphasis on the pathophysiology and conventional management of variceal hemorrhage, current and emerging indications for TIPS creation, TIPS clinical outcomes, and the role of adjuvant embolotherapy.

Review article: the management of portal hypertensive gastropathy and gastric antral vascular ectasia in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) and gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) are important causes of both acute and chronic gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis.

AIM

To review the current management of PHG and GAVE.

METHODS

PubMed was searched for English language articles using the key words 'GAVE', 'gastric antral vascular ectasia', 'cirrhosis', 'gastrointestinal bleeding', 'acute', 'chronic', 'portal hypertensive gastropathy', 'watermelon stomach', 'radiofrequency ablation', 'band ligation', 'thermoablation' and 'TIPSS'.

RESULTS

GAVE and PHG are both encountered in patients with cirrhosis. They can be seen in asymptomatic patients and in those with either acute or chronic gastrointestinal bleeding. PHG, by definition, requires the presence of portal hypertension, with or without cirrhosis, whereas GAVE requires neither cirrhosis nor portal hypertension. They can often be diagnosed on endoscopic appearance alone, but may require biopsy in certain cases. The treatment of PHG is aimed at reducing hepatic venous pressure gradients, most often by pharmacologic means, but may require shunt procedures in severe cases. Management of GAVE on the other hand is predominantly endoscopic, focusing on various ablative techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastric antral vascular ectasia and portal hypertensive gastropathy are distinct entities and are both encountered in cirrhotic patients. Management of portal hypertensive gastropathy is centred on reduction in portal pressures, whereas treatment of gastric antral vascular ectasia is predominantly endoscopic.

Surgical portosystemic shunts in the era of TIPS and liver transplantation are still relevant

BACKGROUND

The surgical portosystemic shunts (PSS) are a time-proven modality for treating portal hypertension. Recently, in the era of liver transplantation and the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS), use of the PSS has declined.

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to evaluate changes in practice, referral patterns, and short- and longterm outcomes of the use of the surgical PSS before and after the introduction of the Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 47 patients undergoing PSS between 1996 and 2011 in a single university hospital was conducted.

RESULTS

Subgroups of patients with cirrhosis (53%), Budd-Chiari syndrome (13%), portal vein thrombosis (PVT) (26%), and other pathologies (9%) differed significantly with respect to shunt type, Child-Pugh class, MELD score and perioperative mortality. Perioperative mortality at 60 days was 15%. Five-year survival was 68% (median: 70 months); 5-year shunt patency was 97%. Survival was best in patients with PVT and worst in those with Budd-Chiari syndrome compared to other subgroups. Patency was better in the subgroups of patients with cirrhosis and other pathologies compared with the PVT subgroup. Substantial changes in referral patterns coincided with the adoption of the MELD in 2002, with decreases in the incidence of cirrhosis and variceal bleeding, and increases in non-cirrhotics and hypercoagulopathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the spectrum of diseases benefiting from surgical PSS has changed, surgical shunts continue to constitute an important addition to the surgical armamentarium. Selected subgroups with variceal bleeding in well-compensated cirrhosis and PVT benefit from the excellent longterm patency offered by the surgical PSS.

Randomized controlled trial of emergency transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus emergency portacaval shunt treatment of acute bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Emergency treatment of bleeding esophageal varices (BEV) in cirrhosis is of paramount importance because of the resultant high mortality rate. Emergency therapy today consists mainly of endoscopic and pharmacologic measures, with use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) when bleeding is not controlled. Surgical portosystemic shunt has been relegated to last resort salvage when all other measures fail. Regrettably, no randomized controlled trials have been reported in which TIPS and surgical portosystemic shunt were compared in unselected patients with acute BEV, with long-term follow-up. This is a report of a long-term prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compared TIPS with emergency portacaval shunt (EPCS) in patients with cirrhosis and acute BEV.

STUDY DESIGN

A total of 154 unselected, consecutive cirrhotic patients ("all comers") with acute BEV were randomized to TIPS (n = 78) or EPCS (n = 76), and the two treatments were compared with regard to effect on survival, control of bleeding, portal-systemic encephalopathy (PSE), and disability. Diagnostic workup was completed within 6 h and TIPS or EPCS was initiated within 24 h. Regular follow-up was accomplished in 100 % of patients and lasted for 5 to 10 years in 85 % and 3 to 4.5 years in the remainder. This report focuses on control of bleeding and survival.

RESULTS

The clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar, and the distribution of Child classes A, B, and C was almost identical. TIPS was successful in controlling BEV for 30 days in 80 % of patients but achieved long-term control of BEV in only 22 %. In contrast, EPCS controlled BEV immediately in all patients and permanently in 97 % (p < 0.001). TIPS patients required almost twice as many units of blood transfusion as EPCS patients. Survival rate at all time intervals and in all Child classes was significantly greater following EPCS than after TIPS (p < 0.001). Median survival was over 10 years following EPCS, compared to 1.99 years following TIPS. Stenosis or occlusion of TIPS was demonstrated in 84 % of patients who survived 21 days, 63 % of whom underwent TIPS revision, which failed in 80 %. In contrast, EPCS remained permanently patent in 97 % of patients. Recurrent PSE was threefold more frequent following TIPS than after EPCS (61 versus 21 %).

CONCLUSIONS

EPCS was uniformly effective in the treatment of BEV, while TIPS was disappointing. EPCS accomplished long-term survival while TIPS resulted in a survival rate that was less than one fifth that of EPCS. The results of this RCT in unselected, consecutive patients justify the use of EPCS as a first-line emergency treatment of BEV in cirrhosis (clinicaltrials.gov #NCT00734227).

[Portosystemic shunt surgery between TIPS and liver transplantation]

Portosystemic shunt surgery in addition to transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) insertion must still be regarded as a current treatment option for portomesenteric decompression in patients with pharmacological and endoscopic treatment failure, where liver transplantation is not imminent. This applies to secondary prophylaxis of rebleeding from varices in patients with well preserved liver function, e.g. liver cirrhosis CHILD A or extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis. Even if emergency endoscopy represents the treatment of choice in the acute bleeding situation, latest data from San Diego on emergency portacaval shunt surgery are encouraging. Likewise, portacaval shunt procedures can be an attractive alternative to TIPS or liver transplantation for acute Budd-Chiari syndrome or veno-occlusive disease.This article is an update on the systematics and methodology of portacaval shunt surgery, emphasizing the significance of this treatment option based on latest studies.

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.

Surgical Shunting versus Transjugular Intrahepatic Portasystemic Shunting for Bleeding Varices Resulting from Portal Hypertension and Cirrhosis: A Meta-Analysis

Surgical shunting was the mainstay in treating portal hypertension for years. Recently, trans-jugular intrahepatic portasystemic shunting (TIPS) has replaced surgical shunting, first as a “bridge” to transplantation and ultimately as first-line therapy for bleeding varices. This study was undertaken to examine evidence from trials comparing TIPS with surgical shunting to reassess the role of surgery in treating portal hypertension. The National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health were searched for clinical trials comparing surgical shunting with TIPS. Meta-analysis using the fixed effects model was undertaken with end points of 30-day and 1- and 2-year survival and shunt failure (inability to complete shunt, irreversible shunt occlusion, major rehemorrhage, unanticipated liver transplantation, death). Three prospective randomized trials and one retrospective case-controlled study were identified. Analysis was limited to patients of Child Classes A or B. Significantly better 2-year survival (OR 2.5 [1.2-5.2]) and significantly less frequent shunt failure (OR 0.3 [0.1-0.9]) were seen in patients undergoing surgical shunting compared with TIPS. Meta-analysis promotes surgical shunting relative to TIPS because of improved survival and less frequent shunt failure. Surgical shunting should be accepted as first-line therapy for bleeding varices resulting from portal hypertension.

[Role of liver function and portal vein congestion index on rebleeding in cirrhotics after distal splenorenal shunt]

BACKGROUND

Bleeding from esophagogastric varices is the worst and most lethal complication of cirrhotic portal hypertension. Distal splenorenal shunt (Warrens surgery) is used in the therapeutic of this patients, Child A and B, with rebleeding after clinical endoscopic therapy. The portal vein congestion index is elevated in cirrhotic portal hypertension and could predict rebleeding after Warrens surgery in these patients.

AIM

To verify if the portal vein congestion index or liver function (Child-Pugh) at preoperative are predictive factors of rebleeding after Warrens surgery.

METHODS

Sixty-two cirrhotic patients were submitted to Warrens surgery at "Santa Casa" Medical School and Hospital - Liver and Portal Hypertension Unit, São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Fifty-eight were analyzed for Child-Pugh class and 36 for portal vein congestion index, divided in two groups: with or without rebleeding and statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

In the rebleeding group, 69% were Child B, with portal vein congestion index = 0.09. The group without rebleeding show us 62% patients Child A with portal vein congestion index = 0.076. The difference was significant for Child-Pugh class but not to portal vein congestion index.

CONCLUSION

Portal vein congestion index was not predictive of rebleeding after Warrens surgery, but cirrhotics Child B have more chance to rebleed after this surgery than Child A.

TIPS in Florida: is its application a result of evidence-based medicine?

BACKGROUND

The typical resident in surgery in the US will not care for a patient with advanced portal hypertension and will not participate in a portacaval shunt. The aim of this study is to compare the number of transjugular intrahepatic portasystemic stent shunts (TIPS) with the number of surgical shunts undertaken in the State of Florida and to assess whether these numbers are consistent with today's evidence-based medicine.

METHODS

We examined the database of the Agency for Health Care Administration of the State of Florida from January 1, 2002, through September 30, 2005, for "intraabdominal venous shunt" (ICD-9 code, 39.1). Data collected include "case mix," "case severity," length of stay, total gross charges, and discharge status. Conclusions about longterm survival from a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing TIPS to surgical shunting were applied to this dataset to determine if the relative frequency of TIPS application in Florida was supported by evidence-based medicine.

RESULTS

TIPS was undertaken more than 12 times as often as surgical shunting (860 patients versus 70 patients). After TIPS versus surgical shunts, average length of stay and hospital charges were less, but case mix, case severity, and in-hospital mortality (11.4% for each) were not different. Applying survival data from a randomized trial comparing TIPS with surgical shunting to the State of Florida database, 129 more people (p < 0.0001) would be alive at 2 years and 137 more (p < 0.0001) would be alive at 5 years after shunting if surgical shunts had been used in lieu of TIPS.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS leads to shorter hospitalizations and reduced hospital charges and is applied in numbers much greater than surgical shunts, despite evidence that suggests inferior longterm efficacy and survival. Current application of TIPS is not a result of evidence-based medicine, and application of surgical shunting is encouraged.

Preshunt liver function remains the prominent determinant of survival after portasystemic shunting

BACKGROUND

Forty-five years after the development of the Child classification, we sought to determine if hepatic function is still a primary determinant between short-term and long-term survival after portasystemic shunting.

METHODS

One hundred forty-six patients underwent small-diameter prosthetic H-graft portacaval shunting (HGPCS). The patients were stratified into 2 groups: those surviving less than 5 years and those surviving more than 5 years. Preoperative data determined Child class and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score.

RESULTS

Ninety-four (64%) patients were short-term and 52 (36%) patients were long-term survivors. No significant differences in the cause of cirrhosis, presence of ascites, encephalopathy, or emergency operations were noted between short- and long-term survivors. Preshunt MELD scores were significantly greater with short-term survivors, although actual survival was superior to predicted survival by MELD. Child class was inferior for short-term survivors. Child class and MELD score significantly correlated with survival after portasystemic shunting.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival after HGPCS is possible even with severe hepatic dysfunction; however, actual survival is superior to predicted survival. Hepatic dysfunction, as denoted by Child class and MELD, still remains a primary determinant of survival after portasystemic shunting.

Natural history of a randomized trial comparing distal spleno-renal shunt with endoscopic sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding: A lesson from the past

AIM: To compare endoscopic sclerotherapy (ES) with distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients during a long-term follow-up period.

METHODS: In 1984 we started a prospective, controlled study of patients with liver cirrhosis. Long-term follow-up presents a natural history of liver cirrhosis complicated by advanced portal hypertension. In this study the effects of 2 types of treatment, DSRS or ES, were evaluated. The study population included 80 patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension referred to our department from October 1984 to March 1991. These patients were drawn from a pool of 282 patients who underwent either elective surgery or ES during the same period of time. Patients were assigned to one of the 2 groups according to a random number table: 40 to DSRS and 40 to ES using polidocanol.

RESULTS: During the postoperative period, no DSRS patient died, while one ES patient died of uncontrolled hemorrhage. One DSRS patient had mild recurrent variceal hemorrhage despite an angiographically patent DSRS and another patient suffered duodenal ulcer rebleeding. Eight ES patients suffered at least one episode of gastrointestinal bleeding: 4 from varices and 4 from esophageal ulcerations. Eight ES patients developed transitory dysphagia. Long-term follow-up was completed in all patients except for 5 cases (2 DSRS and 3 ES patients). Five-year survival rates for shunt (73%) and ES (56%) groups were statistically different: in this follow-up period and in subsequent follow-ups this difference decreased and ceased to be of statistical relevance. The primary cause of death became hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Four DSRS patients rebled due to duodenal ulcer, while eleven ES patients had recurrent bleeding from esophago-gastric sources (seven from varices, three from hypertensive gastropathy, one from esophageal ulcerations) and two from unknown sources. Nine DSRS and 2 ES patients developed a chronic encephalopathy; 13 DSRS and 5 ES patients suffered at least one episode of acute encephalopathy. Five ES patients had esophageal stenoses, which were successfully dilated.

CONCLUSION: In a subgroup of patients with good liver function, DSRS with a correct portal-azygos disconnection more effectively prevents variceal rebleeding than ES. However, this positive effect did not influence the long-term survival because other factors (e.g. HCC) were more important in deciding the fate of the cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension.

Management of the cirrhotic patient that needs surgery

Conditions that necessitate surgery frequently arise in patients with chronic liver disease and cirrhosis. Because cirrhosis has the ability to cause physiologic derangements in every organ system in the body, clinicians face significant challenges in preoperative preparation of the patient with cirrhosis in order to decrease postoperative morbidity and mortality. Emergent operations add an extra dimension of complexity to the clinical picture, due to limited preoperative time to prepare the patient with cirrhosis for surgery. In cases of severely decompensated cirrhosis, clinicians should have in their armamentarium possible alternatives to surgery that can be used to temporize the emergent nature of the disease and improve patient outcomes. The classification of cirrhotic liver disease by Child and Turcotte was initially utilized to predict mortality in patients undergoing surgically placed shunts for portal hypertensive bleeding. Subsequent studies have pointed to the fact that other general and thoracic surgery procedures can be assigned predicted mortality rates according to a similar classification scheme, the modified Child-Pugh score. Patients with cirrhosis facing surgery should undergo a careful history and physical examination and should be accurately placed into a designated Child-Pugh category. Because the modified Child-Pugh class is the most reliable determinant of postoperative morbidity and mortality, every attempt should be made to upgrade a patient's class in a favorable direction prior to surgery. Patients should be carefully evaluated for the presence of ascites and dietary alterations. In addition, medical management with diuretics should be employed to prevent postoperative ascites leak and possible infectious complications including bacterial peritonitis. Perhaps one of the most feared complications in the patient with cirrhosis facing surgery is hemorrhage. Because the liver is vital in maintenance of coagulation homeostasis, several pharmacologic adjuncts may be administered to correct any coagulopathy in the peri-operative period. Several diseases such as cholelithiasis and peptic ulcer disease are known to be more prevalent in the cirrhotic patient, and clinicians treating these diseases should have a thorough understanding of the pathophysiology of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertensive bleeding that are considered good surgical candidates (ie, Child-Pugh class A) may benefit from surgical portasystemic shunt in contrast to angiographically placed portacaval shunt (ie, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt ) due to the lack of durable patency and cost effectiveness in the latter. In patients with cirrhosis awaiting orthotopic liver transplantation, TIPS may be a lifesaving temporizing technique that is utilized as a bridge to transplantation.

TIPS: an update

During the last 15 years the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure has become a safe and effective treatment of portal hypertension. Its major obstacle, the high rate of shunt insufficiency, is going to be solved by the availability of covered stents showing a patency rate of up to 90%. The treatment of acute oesophageal and gastric variceal bleeding is an unsolved problem because variceal bleeding remains the major cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. TIPS has become the rescue treatment of choice because it combines high efficacy with low invasiveness. In this context, the timing of the rescue TIPS is of major importance for achieving definitive haemostasis before multi-organ failure develops. In the prevention of re-bleeding, TIPS is accepted as a second-line treatment, required in about 10-20% of patients. TIPS may be indicated when more than two significant re-bleedings occurred within a time frame of 12 months in spite of adequate first-line measures i.e. drugs or ligation. Refractory ascites is the third main indication for TIPS. Five randomized studies comparing TIPS with paracentesis show good response and comparable survival. Interpretations of authors and comments of reviewers are, however, controversial and do not permit a definitive recommendation.

When endoscopic therapy or pharmacotherapy fails to control variceal bleeding: what should be done? Immediate control of bleeding by TIPS?

BACKGROUND

Acute variceal bleeding is the major cause of death in patients with chronic liver disease. This justifies the search for a more effective therapy to achieve rapid and definitive hemostasis in every patient. At present, the recommended standard treatment for acute variceal bleeding consists of immediate drug treatment with terlipressin or octreotide together with early endoscopic band ligation or sclerotherapy. In the case of ectopic varices terlipressin and cyanoacrylate embolization (if varices can be reached by endoscope) are in use.

FOCUS

The treatment is considered to have failed when bleeding continues or significant bleeding recurs within 48 h. This indicates the need for emergency transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting (TIPS) which has been regarded as rescue treatment of choice when standard treatment fails. Although randomized studies against supportive treatment are lacking, the high efficacy and relatively low mortality after TIPS implantation are convincing. It is reasonable that smaller shunts should be preferred (probably 8 mm in diameter) since most patients have an increased risk of liver failure. To increase the effect of the shunt with respect to acute hemostasis it should be combined with transjugular embolization of the varices.

CONCLUSION

Only strict adherence to the definition of failure of standard treatment and a generous indication to the TIPS implantation before multiorgan failure occurs may decrease the high mortality of acute variceal bleeding.

Current state of portosystemic shunt surgery

BACKGROUND

A switch to decompressive shunt procedures is mandatory if endoscopic therapy fails to control recurrent variceal hemorrhage. Surgical shunt procedures continue to be safe, highly effective, and durable procedures to treat variceal bleeding in patients with low operative risk and good liver function.

DISCUSSION

In cirrhotics, elective operations using portal flow preserving techniques such as a selective distal splenorenal shunt (Warren) and a partial portocaval small diameter interposition shunt (Sarfeh) should be preferred. Rarely, end-to-side portocaval shunt may serve as a salvage procedure if emergency endoscopic treatment or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt insertion fails to stop bleeding. Until definitive results from randomized trials are available patients with good prognosis (Child-Pugh A and B) should be regarded as candidates for surgical shunts. For patients with noncirrhotic portal hypertension, in particular with extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis, portosystemic shunt surgery represents the only effective therapy which leads to freedom of recurrent bleeding and repeated endoscopies for many years, and improves hypersplenism without deteriorating liver function or encephalopathy. Gastroesophageal devascularization and other direct variceal ablative procedures should be restricted to treat endoscopic therapy failures without shuntable portal tributaries.

Current use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts

The principal indication for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) continues to be rescue therapy for variceal hemorrhage that cannot be controlled by endoscopic or medical therapy. TIPS provide no survival advantage in prevention of rebleeding or refractory ascites. The indications for TIPS continue to expand, however, especially for Budd-Chiari syndrome and hydrothorax. Other more novel indications include bleeding portal hypertensive gastropathy or ectopic varices, Budd-Chiari syndrome, veno-occlusive disease, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatopulmonary syndrome, hepatocellular carcinoma, and polycystic liver disease. Great strides have been made recently in models to predict mortality and complications following TIPS placement. Graft stents hold promise based on early studies. Finally, complications are common and may be life threatening.

Management of variceal bleeding

Variceal hemorrhage complicates cirrhosis in as many as 50% of patients and results in considerable morbidity and mortality. This review covers all areas of importance in the prevention and treatment of this area, highlighting recent developments. Primary prophylaxis prevents first bleed, and pharmacotherapy with beta-blockade is the most widely accepted option. In an acute variceal hemorrhage, initial resuscitation and multiple organ support are paramount and are recommended along with antibiotic prophylaxis and specific medical therapies that may be given empirically before emergency endoscopy to reduce bleeding. Endoscopic techniques usually arrest bleeding, but when they fail, salvage therapy in the form of balloon tamponade, then transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts or surgery, may be appropriate. Secondary prophylaxis to prevent rebleeding is often instituted in the ICU and is vital to prevent recurrence of this life-threatening complication.