Outcomes after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt: a "bridge" to nowhere

Renal-function change after transjugular intra-hepatic portosystemic shunt placement and its relationship with survival: a single-center experience

Background

The effect of transjugular intra-hepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement on renal function and the correlation of post-TIPS Cr with mortality remain unclear. This study aimed to assess the effect of TIPS placement on renal function and to examine the relationship between post-TIPS Cr and mortality risk.

Methods

A total of 593 patients who underwent de novo TIPS placement between 2004 and 2017 at a single institution were included in the study. The pre-TIPS Cr level (T0; within 7 days before TIPS placement) and post-TIPS Cr levels, at 1–2 days (T1), 5–12 days (T2), and 15–40 days (T3), were collected. Predictors of Cr change after TIPS placement and the 1-year mortality rate were analysed using multivariable linear-regression and Cox proportional-hazards models, respectively.

Results

Overall, 21.4% of patients (n = 127) had elevated baseline Cr (≥1.5 mg/dL; mean, 2.51 ± 1.49 mg/dL) and 78.6% (n = 466) had normal baseline Cr (<1.5 mg/dL; mean, 0.92 ± 0.26 mg/dL). Patients with elevated pre-TIPS Cr demonstrated a decrease in post-TIPS Cr (difference, −0.60 mg/dL), whereas patients with normal baseline Cr exhibited no change (difference, <0.01 mg/dL). The 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality rates were 13%, 20%, and 32%, respectively. Variceal bleeding as a TIPS-placement indication (hazard ratio = 1.731; P = 0.036), higher T0 Cr (hazard ratio = 1.834; P = 0.012), and higher T3 Cr (hazard ratio = 3.524; P < 0.001) were associated with higher 1-year mortality risk.

Conclusion

TIPS placement improved renal function in patients with baseline renal dysfunction and the post-TIPS Cr level was a strong predictor of 1-year mortality risk.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation may be associated with hyperplastic hepatic nodular lesions in the long term: an analysis of 18 pediatric and young adult patients

BACKGROUND

Retrospective studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of pediatric and adolescent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), but long-term outcomes warrant further investigation.

OBJECTIVE

To report on the development of hyperplastic hepatic nodular lesion development in children and young adults (<21 years) with TIPS patency >3 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighteen children and young adults, including 10 (55.6%) females and 8 (44.4%) males, underwent TIPS creation with >3 years' patency and follow-up evaluation at a tertiary children's hospital. The mean age at the time of TIPS creation was 12.5±5.1 years (range: 1.5-20.0 years). The mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) at the time of TIPS creation was 8.1±1.6 (range: 6-11). Indications for TIPS creation included acute variceal bleeding (8/18, 44.4%), primary (1/18, 5.6%) or secondary (7/18, 38.9%) prevention of varices, portal vein thrombosis (1/18, 5.6%), and splenic sequestration (1/18, 5.6%). Technical successes, intra-procedural parameters, hemodynamic and clinical successes, TIPS patencies, adverse events, imaging evaluations, and follow-ups were recorded.

RESULTS

All (100%) TIPS placements were successful; however, a direct intrahepatic portosystemic shunt was created in one (5.6%) patient. Mean reduction of the portosystemic shunt gradient was 9.1±3.3 mmHg (range: 4-16 mmHg). Seventeen (94.4%) patients demonstrated clinical success with resolution of their initial clinical indication for TIPS placement. The 3-year TIPS primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patencies were 83.3% (15/18), 94.4% (17/18), and 100% (18/18), respectively. Two (11.1%) patients developed mild, medically controlled hepatic encephalopathy. One (5.6%) patient developed hepatopulmonary syndrome. Nine (50%) patients developed single or multiple hepatic nodules at a mean imaging surveillance time after TIPS of 4.4±3.0 years (range: 1.5-10.2 years). Six (33.3%) patients developed nodules >1 cm with imaging features most consistent with focal nodular hyperplasia or focal nodular hyperplasia-like nodules. The mean follow-up duration was 5.7±2.9 years (range: 3.0-13.1 years).

CONCLUSION

Long-term (>3 years) portosystemic shunting via TIPS is associated with the development of hepatic nodular lesions in children. Consequently, children with TIPS may need gray-scale assessment of hepatic parenchyma as part of routine ultrasound exams and extended imaging surveillance until more is understood regarding the natural history of induced nodularity.

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.

Technical success and outcomes in pediatric patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement: a 20-year experience

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement has been extensively studied in adults. The experience with TIPS placement in pediatric patients, however, is limited.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to report technical success and clinical outcomes in pediatric patients undergoing TIPS placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-one children - 12 (57%) boys and 9 (43%) girls, mean age 12.1 years (range, 2-17 years) - underwent TIPS placement from January 1997 to January 2017. Etiologies of hepatic dysfunction included biliary atresia (n=5; 24%), cryptogenic cirrhosis (n=4; 19%), portal or hepatic vein thrombosis (n=4, 14%), autosomal-recessive polycystic kidney disease (n=3; 14%), primary sclerosing cholangitis (n=2; 10%) and others (n=3, 14%). Indications for TIPS placement included variceal hemorrhage (n=20; 95%) and refractory ascites (n=1; 5%). Technical success, manometry findings, stent type, hemodynamic success, complications, liver enzymes, and clinical outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

TIPS placement was technically successful in 20 of 21 (95%) children, with no immediate complications. Mean pre- and post-TIPS portosystemic gradient was 18.5±10.7 mmHg and 7.1±3.9 mmHg, respectively. Twenty-two total stents were successfully placed in 20 children. Stents used included: Viatorr (n=9; 41%), Wallstent (n=7; 32%), Express (n=5; 23%), and iCAST (n=1; 5%). All children had resolution of variceal bleeding or ascites. TIPS revision was required in 9 (45%) children, with a mean of 2.2 revisions. Hepatic encephalopathy developed in 10 children (48%), at a mean of 223.7 days following TIPS placement. During the study, 6 (29%) children underwent liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

TIPS placement in pediatric patients has high technical success with excellent resolution of variceal hemorrhage and ascites. TIPS revision was required in nearly half of the cohort, with hepatic encephalopathy common after shunt placement.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt as a bridge to liver transplant: Current state and future directions

Liver transplantation is one of the mainstays of treatment for liver failure due to severe chronic liver disease. Bridging therapies, such as placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), are frequently employed to control complications of portal hypertension such as ascites, hydrothorax, and variceal bleeding, and thereby reduce morbidity in patients awaiting transplant. There is no significant difference seen in either graft survival or patient survival between those receiving TIPS pre-transplant and those who do not, although those receiving TIPS placement on average have a longer waiting time on the transplant waitlist. Locoregional therapies, such as thermal ablation or chemoembolization, can be efficacious in patients with HCC and pre-existing TIPS; however there is a risk for increased adverse events in patients receiving these therapies who have TIPS compared to those who do not. In summary, TIPS is a safe, effective treatment that can be used to ameliorate the complications that are sequelae of portal hypertension. While it does not appear to improve survival post-transplant, TIPS placement pre-transplant may increase survival time to transplant, thus improving overall survival as well as quality of life.

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.

Surgical portosystemic shunts versus devascularisation procedures for prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis

BACKGROUND

Hepatosplenic schistosomiasis is an important cause of variceal bleeding in low-income countries. Randomised clinical trials have evaluated the outcomes of two categories of surgical interventions, shunts and devascularisation procedures, for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis. The comparative overall benefits and harms of these two interventions are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisation procedures for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, reference lists of articles, and proceedings of relevant associations for trials that met the inclusion criteria (date of search 11 January 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisation procedures for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

We found two randomised clinical trials including 154 adult participants, aged between 18 years and 65 years, diagnosed with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis. One of the trials randomised participants to proximal splenorenal shunt versus distal splenorenal shunt versus oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy, and the other randomised participants to distal splenorenal shunt versus oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. In both trials the diagnosis of hepatosplenic schistosomiasis was made based on clinical and biochemical assessments. The trials were conducted in Brazil and Egypt. Both trials were at high risk of bias.We are uncertain as to whether surgical portosystemic shunts improved all-cause mortality compared with oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy due to imprecision in the trials (risk ratio (RR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 9.92; participants = 154; studies = 2). We are uncertain whether serious adverse events differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy (RR 2.26, 95% CI 0.44 to 11.70; participants = 154; studies = 2). None of the trials reported on health-related quality of life. We are uncertain whether variceal rebleeding differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.23; participants = 154; studies = 2). We found evidence suggesting an increase in encephalopathy in the shunts group versus the devascularisation with splenectomy group (RR 7.51, 95% CI 1.45 to 38.89; participants = 154; studies = 2). We are uncertain whether ascites and re-interventions differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. We computed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes, but the trial sequential monitoring boundaries could not be drawn because of insufficient sample size and events. We downgraded the overall certainty of the body of evidence for all outcomes to very low due to risk of bias and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the very low certainty of the available body of evidence and the low number of clinical trials, we could not determine an overall benefit or harm of surgical portosystemic shunts compared with oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. Future randomised clinical trials should be designed with sufficient statistical power to assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisations with or without splenectomy and with or without oesophageal transection.

Gastroesophageal Variceal Bleeding Successfully Controlled by Partial Splenic Embolization

A 53-year-old male patient with a history of hepatocellular carcinoma developed gastroesophageal varices refractory to endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS). He required EIS six times in 2 years for recurring variceal bleeding. After hepatic resection, he developed massive splenomegaly. Partial splenic embolization (PSE) was performed to reduce the portal pressure. Varices and variceal bleeding were not detected during 13-year follow up, until the patient died of hepatocellular carcinoma. This is a unique case of gastroesophageal varices controlled by PSE and improved portal hypertension.

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.

Clinical outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension: Korean multicenter real-practice data

Background/Aims

This retrospective study assessed the clinical outcome of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure for managing portal hypertension in Koreans with liver cirrhosis.

Methods

Between January 2003 and July 2013, 230 patients received a TIPS in 13 university-based hospitals.

Results

Of the 229 (99.6%) patients who successfully underwent TIPS placement, 142 received a TIPS for variceal bleeding, 84 for refractory ascites, and 3 for other indications. The follow-up period was 24.9±30.2 months (mean±SD), 74.7% of the stents were covered, and the primary patency rate at the 1-year follow-up was 78.7%. Hemorrhage occurred in 30 (21.1%) patients during follow-up; of these, 28 (93.3%) cases of rebleeding were associated with stent dysfunction. Fifty-four (23.6%) patients developed new hepatic encephalopathy, and most of these patients were successfully managed conservatively. The cumulative survival rates at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months were 87.5%, 75.0%, 66.8%, and 57.5%, respectively. A high Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was significantly associated with the risk of death within the first month after receiving a TIPS (P=0.018). Old age (P<0.001), indication for a TIPS (ascites vs. bleeding, P=0.005), low serum albumin (P<0.001), and high MELD score (P=0.006) were associated with overall mortality.

Conclusions

A high MELD score was found to be significantly associated with early and overall mortality rate in TIPS patients. Determining the appropriate indication is warranted to improve survival in these patients.