TIPSS for variceal bleeding in patients with idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension: comparison with patients who have cirrhosis

Hepatic encephalopathy in non-cirrhotic portal hypertension

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is traditionally associated with hepatic parenchymal diseases, such as acute liver failure and cirrhosis. Its prevalence in non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) patients, extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO), and non-cirrhotic portal fibrosis (NCPF) is less well described. HE in NCPH allows one to study the effect of portosystemic shunting and ammonia without significant hepatic parenchymal injury. The current review narrates the spectrum and management of hepatic encephalopathy in NCPH patients. We synthesized data from various studies on the occurrence and management of HE in NCPH, mainly EHPVO, idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (INCPH), and porto-sinusoidal vascular disease (PSVD). The prevalence of minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) in NCPH is reported from 12 to 60%, depending on the condition and diagnostic criteria. MHE was reported in nearly a third of EHPVO patients. Studies show that venous ammonia levels are significantly elevated in patients with MHE and spontaneous shunts (82.4 ± 20.3 vs. 47.1 ± 16.7 µmol/L, P = 0.001). Large portosystemic shunts substantially increase the risk of HE, with 46-71% of patients with persistent or recurrent HE having identifiable shunts. Management of HE in NCPH primarily focuses on reducing ammonia levels through lactulose, which has shown improvement in 53% of patients with MHE after three months (P = 0.001). Shunt occlusion in patients with large portosystemic shunts is helpful in selected cases. HE in NCPH, particularly in EHPVO, is associated with elevated ammonia levels and spontaneous shunts. Despite the high prevalence of HE in NCPH, this is still a neglected aspect in the care of NCPH. A high index of suspicion and the application of appropriate screening tools are crucial for timely diagnosis and management. HE screening tools that are well-studied in cirrhosis, are also valid in NCPH. Effective management strategies include lactulose, rifaximin, dietary modifications, and shunt embolisation in some cases. Future research should focus on the long-term natural history and efficacy of treatment strategies in this population.

Porto-sinusoidal Vascular Disease: Classification and Clinical Relevance

Non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) is a well-recognized clinico-pathological entity, which is associated with clinical signs and symptoms, imaging, and endoscopic features of portal hypertension (PHT), in absence of cirrhosis. In patients with NCPH without known risk factors of PHT or extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis, the condition is called idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (INCPH). There are multiple infectious, immune related causes, systemic diseases, drug and toxin exposures, haematological disorders, and metabolic risk factors that have been associated with this INCPH. However, the causal pathogenesis is still unclear. The Vascular liver disorders interest group group recently proposed porto-sinusoidal vascular disease (PSVD) as a syndromic entity, which provides definite histopathological criteria for diagnosis of NCPH (table 1). The three classical histo-morphological lesions specific for PSVD include obliterative portal venopathy, nodular regenerative hyperplasia, and incomplete septal fibrosis. The PSVD definition includes patients with portal vein thrombosis, PVT, and even those without PHT, thus broadening the scope of diagnosis to include patients who may have presented early, prior to haemodynamic changes consistent with PHT. However, this new diagnosis has pros and cons. The cons include mandating invasive liver biopsy to assess the PSVD histological triad in all patients with NCPH, an erstwhile clinical diagnosis in Asian patients. In addition, the natural history of the subclinical forms of PSVD without PHT and linear progression to develop PHT is unknown yet. In this review, we discuss the diagnosis and treatment of INCPH/PSVD, fallacies and strengths of the old and new schema, pathobiology of this disease, and clinical correlates in an Asian context. Although formulation of standardised diagnostic criteria is useful for comparison of clinical cohorts with INCPH/PSVD, prospective clinical validation in global cohorts is necessary to avoid misclassification of vascular disorders of the liver.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in Nonmalignant Noncirrhotic Portal Vein Thrombosis and Portosinusoidal Vascular Disorder

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) emerges as a key treatment for portal hypertension (PH) complications. While international guidelines provide clear indications for its use in cirrhosis, empirical knowledge is notably scarcer in non-cirrhotic PH, particularly in nonmalignant noncirrhotic portal vein thrombosis (NNPVT) and in patients with portosinusoidal vascular disorder (PSVD). Patients afflicted by these rare diseases exhibit distinct clinical profiles compared to their cirrhotic counterparts, often characterized by a younger age, predominantly preserved hepatic functionality even in cases of severe PH, and a higher propensity for extensive splanchnic thrombosis, which intricately complicates TIPS placement, posing unique challenges for its creation. The objective of this review is to synthesize existing literature on the effectiveness, safety, specific indications, and clinical outcomes of TIPS in adult patients with NNPVT or PSVD, focusing also on the technical challenges of TIPS insertion in the presence of portal cavernoma.

A Narrative Review on Non-Cirrohotic Portal Hypertension: Not All Portal Hypertensions Mean Cirrhosis

Non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH), also known as idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (INCPH) and porto-sinusoidal vascular disorder (PSVD), is a rare disease characterized by intrahepatic portal hypertension (IPH) in the absence of cirrhosis. The precise etiopathogenesis of IPH is an area of ongoing research. NCPH diagnosis is challenging, as there are no specific tests available to confirm the disease, and a high-quality liver biopsy, detailed clinical information, and an expert pathologist are necessary for diagnosis. Currently, the treatment of NCPH relies on the prevention of complications related to portal hypertension, following current guidelines of cirrhotic portal hypertension. No treatment has been studied that aimed to modify the natural history of the disease; however, transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt (TIPS) placement, shunt and liver transplantation are considerable symptomatic options. In this review, we discuss the heterogeneity of NCPH as well as its etiopathogenesis, clinical presentation and management issues. Starting from the assumption that portal hypertension does not always mean cirrhosis, cooperative studies are probably needed to clarify the issues of etiology and the possible genetic background of this rare disease. This knowledge might lead to better treatment and perhaps better prevention.

Prevalence of hepatic encephalopathy in patients with non-cirrhotic portal hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy, (HE) although commonly associated with cirrhosis, has also been reported in non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH). The importance of identifying and treating HE in NCPH lies in the fact that many patients may be wrongly diagnosed as having psychiatric or neurologic disorders. Hence, we aimed to systematically review the prevalence of HE in NCPH.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of three databases (Medline, Embase and Scopus) was conducted from inception to November 2022 for studies reporting on the prevalence of minimal HE (MHE) and overt HE (OHE) in patients with NCPH. Results were presented as pooled proportions with their 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Total 25 studies (n = 1487) were included after screening 551 records. The pooled prevalence of MHE in NPCH was 32.9% (95% CI: 26.7-39.0) without any difference between adult (32.9%, 95% CI: 23.5-42.3) and pediatric patients (32.6%, 95% CI: 26.1-39.1) (p = 0.941). There was no significant difference in the prevalence between patients with NCPH and compensated cirrhosis with odds ratio of 1.06 (95% CI: 0.77-1.44). The pooled event rate for prior history of OHE in NCPH was 1.2% (95% CI: 0.3-2.1).

CONCLUSION

Around one-third of the patients with NCPH have MHE, irrespective of age group. OHE is extremely rare in NCPH and is usually associated with a precipitating factor.

New Indications for TIPSs: What Do We Know So Far?

Since 1988, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been an effective therapy for portal hypertension in many settings. Thanks to continuous technical improvements and a wiser selection of patients, excellent results have been achieved with this therapeutic strategy. The historical indications for TIPS placement, in the context of liver cirrhosis, such as refractory ascites and variceal bleeding are now well established and known. However, in recent years, new indications are emerging. These have been investigated and approved in some studies but are not yet included in guidelines and clinical practice. This review aims to highlight what is new for the role of TIPS in portal vein thrombosis (especially in patients awaiting liver transplantation), in recurrent ascites and not only refractory ascites, as a neoadjuvant therapy before abdominal surgery and, finally, in the setting of noncirrhotic portal hypertension. All these new aspects are addressed in this review with a critical approach based on the literature revision and clinical practice. Future research is needed to explore and validate the new role of TIPS in these scenarios.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension: 30 years experience from China

Liver diseases are a major cause of illness and death worldwide. In China, liver diseases, primarily viral hepatitis, affect approximately 300 million people, thus having a major impact on the global burden of liver diseases. Portal hypertension is the most severe complication of chronic liver diseases, including ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and bleeding from gastroesophageal varices. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) represents a very effective treatment of these complications. Since its introduction 30 years ago in China, the use of TIPS has evolved and has played an increasingly important role in the management of the complications of portal hypertension. This review will focus on the history, current application and management of complications of TIPS in China.

Interventional Management of Portal Hypertension in Cancer Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an overview of the classifications and clinical hallmarks of common cancer-related conditions that contribute to the high incidence of portal hypertension in this population and provide an update on currently available interventional radiology therapeutic approaches.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last few decades, there have been significant advancements in understanding the pathophysiology of portal hypertension. This knowledge has led to the development of safer and more effective minimally invasive approaches. The main objective is to provide alternatives to prevent life-threatening complications from clinically significant portal hypertension and to allow the continuation of cancer treatment interventions that would otherwise be stopped. Clinicians involved in cancer care should be aware of risk factors, associated complications, and management of portal hypertension in cancer patients. Interventional radiology offers minimally invasive alternatives that play a central role in improving clinical outcomes and survival of these patients, allowing the continuation of cancer treatments.

North American Practice-Based Recommendations for Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts in Portal Hypertension

Complications of portal hypertension, including ascites, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatic hydrothorax, and hepatic encephalopathy, are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite few high-quality randomized controlled trials to guide therapeutic decisions, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation has emerged as a crucial therapeutic option to treat complications of portal hypertension. In North America, the decision to perform TIPS involves gastroenterologists, hepatologists, and interventional radiologists, but TIPS creation is performed by interventional radiologists. This is in contrast to other parts of the world where TIPS creation is performed primarily by hepatologists. Thus, the successful use of TIPS in North America is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach and technical expertise, so as to optimize outcomes. Recently, new procedural techniques, TIPS stent technology, and indications for TIPS have emerged. As a result, practices and outcomes vary greatly across institutions and significant knowledge gaps exist. In this consensus statement, the Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches group critically reviews the application of TIPS in the management of portal hypertension. Advancing Liver Therapeutic Approaches convened a multidisciplinary group of North American experts from hepatology, interventional radiology, transplant surgery, nephrology, cardiology, pulmonology, and hematology to critically review existing literature and develop practice-based recommendations for the use of TIPS in patients with any cause of portal hypertension in terms of candidate selection, procedural best practices and, post-TIPS management; and to develop areas of consensus for TIPS indications and the prevention of complications. Finally, future research directions are identified related to TIPS for the management of portal hypertension.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt with or without gastro-oesophageal variceal embolisation for the prevention of variceal rebleeding: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The role of variceal embolisation at the time of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for the prevention of gastro-oesophageal variceal rebleeding remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate whether adding variceal embolisation to TIPS placement could reduce the incidence of rebleeding after TIPS in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial at one university hospital in China. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with cirrhosis and had variceal bleeding in the past 6 weeks, and they were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive TIPS (with a covered stent in both groups) plus variceal embolisation (TIPS plus embolisation group) or TIPS alone (TIPS group) to prevent variceal rebleeding. Randomisation was done using a web-based randomisation system using a Pocock and Simon's minimisation method, stratified by Child-Pugh class (A vs B vs C). Clinicians and patients were not masked to treatment allocation; individuals involved in data analysis were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the 2-year cumulative incidence of variceal rebleeding after randomisation, and analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02119988.

FINDINGS

Between June 16, 2014, and Feb 3, 2016, 205 patients were screened, of whom 134 were randomly allocated to the TIPS plus embolisation group (n=69) and the TIPS group (n=65). TIPS placement and variceal embolisation was successful in all 134 patients, all were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in the 2-year cumulative incidence of variceal rebleeding between the two groups (TIPS plus embolisation 11·6% [95% CI 4·0-19·1] vs TIPS 13·8% [5·4-22·2]; hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·42-1·61]; p=0·566). Adverse events were similar between the two groups; the most common adverse events were peptic ulcer or gastritis (12 [17%] of patients in the TIPS plus embolisation group vs 13 [20%] of patients in the TIPS group), new or worsening ascites (ten [14%] vs six [9%]), and hepatocellular carcinoma (four [6%] vs six [9%]). The numbers of deaths were also similar between groups (24 [35%] vs 25 [38%]) INTERPRETATION: Adding variceal embolisation to TIPS did not significantly reduce the incidence of variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis. Our findings do not support concomitant variceal embolisation during TIPS for the prevention of variceal rebleeding.

FUNDING

National Key Technology R&D Program, Boost Program of Xijing Hospital, and China Postdoctoral Science Foundation.

Isolated gastric variceal bleeding related to non-cirrhotic portal hypertension following oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy: A case report

BACKGROUND

Sinusoidal obstruction syndrome has been reported after oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy, but liver fibrosis and non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) are rarely reported.

CASE SUMMARY

Here, we describe the case of a 64-year-old woman who developed isolated gastric variceal bleeding 16 mo after completing eight cycles of oxaliplatin combined with capecitabine chemotherapy after colon cancer resection. Surprisingly, splenomegaly and thrombocytopenia were not accompanied by variceal bleeding, which has been reported to have predictive value for gastric variceal formation. However, a liver biopsy showed fibrosis in the portal area, suggesting NCPH. The patient underwent endoscopic treatment and experienced no further symptoms.

CONCLUSION

It is necessary to guard against long-term complications after oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Sometimes splenic size and platelet level may not always accurately predict the occurrence of portal hypertension.

Novel technique in treating portal cavernous transformation with portal Biliopathy

We present a case report of a patient who is a non-cirrhotic with portal cavernous transformation secondary to previous trauma. The patient presents with portal biliopathy requiring ERCP/EUS with biliary stenting. The patient was referred to Interventional Radiology (IR) for portal vein recanalization. The patient underwent a novel technique of transplenic access with portal vein recanalization via a gunsight technique, ultimately receiving a direct intrahepatic portocaval shunt (DIPS). Subsequently, his symptoms resolved, and the biliary stent was successfully removed.

Portal vein recanalisation alone to treat severe portal hypertension in non-cirrhotic patients with chronic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction

Background & Aims

We aimed to evaluate long-term outcome of patients with chronic non-cirrhotic extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (CNC-EHPVO) who underwent portal vein recanalisation (PVR) without transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) insertion and to determine factors predicting PVR failure and stent occlusion.

Methods

This retrospective monocentric study included all patients who underwent PVR without TIPS insertion in the context of CNC-EHPVO between the years 2000 and 2019. Primary patency was defined by the absence of a complete stent occlusion on follow-up imaging.

Results

A total of 31 patients underwent PVR with a median follow-up of 52 months (24–82 months). Indications were gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 13), abdominal pain attributed to CNC-EHPVO (n = 7), prior to abdominal surgery (n = 4), and others (n = 7). Technical success was obtained in 27 patients. PVR failure was associated with extension within the intrahepatic portal veins (p = 0.005) and recanalisation for abdominal pain (p = 0.02). Adverse events occurred in 6 patients with no mortality. Anticoagulation was administered in 21 patients after technical success of PVR. In patients with technical success, 5-year primary patency was 73% and was associated with improved muscle mass (p = 0.007) and decreased spleen volume (p = 0.01) at 1 year. Furthermore, 21 (78%) patients with PVR technical success were free of portal hypertension complication at 5 years.

Conclusions

PVR without TIPS insertion was feasible and safe in selected patients with CNC-EHPVO and portal hypertension with past or expected complications. Primary patency at 5 years was obtained in 3 of 4 patients with technical success of PVR and was associated with a control of complications of CNC-EHPVO. PVR was associated with improvement of sarcopenia and decreased spleen volume at 1 year.

Lay summary

Patients with chronic obstruction of the portal vein and without cirrhosis or malignancy can develop complications related to the high pressure in the venous system. The present study reports long-term favourable outcome of patients in whom the obstruction was treated with stents.

•

CNC-EHPVO with severe portal hypertension can be treated with PVR alone.

•

After technical success of PVR, the 5-year primary patency is above 70%.

•

After technical success of PVR, 78% of patients had complete resolution of symptoms.

•

Intrahepatic extension of obstruction is associated with failure of PVR.

•

Indication of PVR for abdominal pain is associated with poorer outcome.

Cognitive Impairement in Non-Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension: Highlights on Physiopathology, Diagnosis and Management

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is one of the most frequent complications of cirrhosis. Several studies and case reports have shown that cognitive impairment may also be a tangible complication of portal hypertension secondary to chronic portal vein thrombosis and to porto-sinusoidal vascular disease (PSVD). In these conditions, representing the main causes of non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) in the Western world, both overt and minimal/covert HE occurs in a non-neglectable proportion of patients, even lower than in cirrhosis, and it is mainly sustained by the presence of large porto-systemic shunt. In these patients, the liver function is usually preserved or only mildly altered, and the development of porto-systemic shunt is either spontaneous or iatrogenically frequent; HE is an example of type-B HE. To date, in the absence of strong evidence and large cooperative studies, for the diagnosis and the management of HE in NCPH, the same approach used for HE occurring in cirrhosis is applied. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of type B hepatic encephalopathy, focusing on its pathophysiology, diagnostic tools and management in patients affected by porto-sinusoidal vascular disease and chronic portal vein thrombosis.

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

TIPS for Adults Without Cirrhosis With Chronic Mesenteric Venous Thrombosis and EHPVO Refractory to Standard-of-Care Therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Extrahepatic portal vein occlusion (EHPVO) from portal vein thrombosis is a rare condition associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) for the treatment of chronic EHPVO, cavernomatosis, and mesenteric venous thrombosis in adults without cirrhosis who are refractory to standard-of-care therapy.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients with chronic EHPVO received TIPS. Laboratory parameters and follow-up were assessed at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and every 6 months thereafter. Two hepatologists adjudicated symptom improvement attributable to mesenteric thrombosis and EHPVO before/after TIPS. Kaplan-Meier was used to assess primary and overall TIPS patency, assessing procedural success. Adverse events, radiation exposure, hospital length-of-stay and patency were recorded. Cavernoma was present in 100%, with TIPS being successful in all cases using splenic, mesenteric, and transhepatic approaches. Symptom improvement was noted in 26 of 30 (87%) at 6-month follow-up. Twelve patients (31%) experienced TIPS thrombosis. There were no significant long-term laboratory adverse events or deaths. At 36 months, freedom from primary TIPS thrombosis was 63%; following secondary interventions, overall patency was increased to 81%.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS in chronic, noncirrhotic EHPVO with cavernomas and mesenteric venous thrombosis is technically feasible and does not adversely affect liver function. Most patients demonstrate subjective and objective benefit from TIPS. Improvement in patency rates are needed with proper timing of adjuvant anticoagulation.

The role of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in patients with portal hypertension: advantages and pitfalls

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an effective interventional procedure to relieve portal hypertension, which is a main mechanism for the development of complications of liver cirrhosis (LC), such as variceal hemorrhage, ascites, and hepatorenal syndrome. However, the high incidence of adverse events after TIPS implementation limits its application in clinical practice. Esophageal variceal hemorrhage is one of the major indications for TIPS. Recently, preemptively performed TIPS has been recommended, as several studies have shown that TIPS significantly reduced mortality as well as rebleeding or failure to control bleeding in patients who are at high risk of treatment failure for bleeding control with endoscopic variceal ligation and vasoactive drugs. Meanwhile, recurrent ascites is another indication for TIPS with a proven survival benefit. TIPS may also be considered as an effective treatment for other LC complications, usually as an alternative therapy. Although there are concerns about the development of hepatic encephalopathy and hepatic dysfunction after TIPS implementation, careful patient selection using prognostic scores can lead to excellent outcomes. Assessments of cardiac and renal function prior to TIPS may also be considered to improve patient prognosis.

Causes and Management of Non-cirrhotic Portal Hypertension​

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) includes a heterogeneous group of conditions. The aim of this paper is to make an overview on the denominations, diagnostical features and management of porto-sinusoidal vascular disease (PSVD) and chronic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) being the main causes of NCPH in the Western world.

RECENT FINDINGS

The management of NCPH consists in the treatment of associated diseases and of portal hypertension (PH). PH due to PSVD or PVT is managed similarly to PH due to cirrhosis. TIPS placement and liver transplantation are considerable options in patients with refractory variceal bleeding/ascites and with progressive liver failure. Anticoagulation is a cornerstone both in the treatment of thrombosis in PSVD and in the prevention of thrombosis recurrence in patients with portal cavernoma. Physicians should be aware of the existence of PSVD and chronic PVT and actively search them in particular settings. To now, the management of portal hypertension-related complications in NCPH is the same of those of cirrhosis. Large cooperative studies on the natural history of NCPH are necessary to better define its management.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunt in the management of portal hypertension

These guidelines on transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunt (TIPSS) in the management of portal hypertension have been commissioned by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee (CSSC) of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) under the auspices of the Liver Section of the BSG. The guidelines are new and have been produced in collaboration with the British Society of Interventional Radiology (BSIR) and British Association of the Study of the Liver (BASL). The guidelines development group comprises elected members of the BSG Liver Section, representation from BASL, a nursing representative and two patient representatives. The quality of evidence and grading of recommendations was appraised using the GRADE system. These guidelines are aimed at healthcare professionals considering referring a patient for a TIPSS. They comprise the following subheadings: indications; patient selection; procedural details; complications; and research agenda. They are not designed to address: the management of the underlying liver disease; the role of TIPSS in children; or complex technical and procedural aspects of TIPSS.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and splenectomy are more effective than endoscopic therapy for recurrent variceal bleeding in patients with idiopathic noncirrhotic portal hypertension

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), splenectomy plus esophagogastric devascularization (SED) and endoscopic therapy + non-selective β-blockers (ET + NSBB) are widely applied in secondary prevention of recurrent gastroesophageal variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. These different treatments, however, have not been compared in patients with idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (INCPH).

AIM

To compare the outcomes of TIPS, SED and ET + NSBB in the control of variceal rebleeding in patients with INCPH.

METHODS

This retrospective study recruited patients from six centers across China. Demographic characteristics, baseline profiles and follow-up clinical outcomes were collected. Post-procedural clinical outcomes, including incidence of rebleeding, hepatic encephalopathy (HE), portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and mortality rates, were compared in the different groups.

RESULTS

In total, 81 patients were recruited, with 28 receiving TIPS, 26 SED, and 27 ET + NSBB. No significant differences in demographic and baseline characteristics were found among these three groups before the procedures. After treatment, blood ammonia was significantly higher in the TIPS group; hemoglobin level and platelet count were significantly higher in the SED group (P < 0.01). Rebleeding rate was significantly higher in the ET + NSBB group (P < 0.01). Mortality was 3.6%, 3.8% and 14.8% in the TIPS, SED and ET + NSBB groups, respectively, with no significant differences (P = 0.082). Logistic regression analysis showed that mortality was significantly correlated with rebleeding, HE, portal thrombosis and superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In patients with INCPH, TIPS and SED were more effective in controlling rebleeding than ET + NSBB, but survival rates were not significantly different among the three groups. Mortality was significantly correlated with rebleeding, HE and PVT.

Long-term Outcome of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in Children With Portal Hypertension

OBJECTIVES

A proportion of children with chronic liver disease have severe portal hypertension (PH) and a preserved synthetic and biliary function. In our institution these children have been managed with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS). We aimed to evaluate the long-term patency of TIPS placed in pediatric patients with PH.

METHODS

Retrospective study of children who underwent TIPS in the last 15 years. We compared patients with cirrhotic PH to those with noncirrhotic PH, and all with an historical cohort of children who underwent a surgical portosystemic shunt. Kaplan-Meier analysis measured long-term shunt patency.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients were recorded (cirrhotic PH = 11, noncirrhotic PH  = 18, mean age 10.3 years[±4.3], mean weight 36.7 kg [±20.1], mean pediatric end-stage liver disease score 4.1 [±7.1]); in 5 TIPS was placed after split liver transplantation. Indication for TIPS was variceal bleeding in 18, refractory ascites in 11. Primary patency rates at 6 months and at 1, 2, and 4 years were 91%, 83%, 60%, and 46%, respectively. At last follow-up (mean of 2.8 years [±2.4, range 0.1-8.1 years]) secondary patency (after radiological revision) was 100%. The patency rate of the historical cohort of patients who underwent a surgical portosystemic shunt was 26 of 31 (82%) at a median follow-up of 12.5 years (1.6-25.8).

CONCLUSION

TIPS appears to have a high mid-term patency rate, especially if monitored and revised. Its high clinical success rate, along with a minimally invasive approach, suggests that in this setting TIPS should not be regarded only as a bridge to liver transplantation.

Exploration of interventional therapy strategy for portal vein occlusion: a case series study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the candidates, efficacy and safety of interventional therapies in the treatment of portal vein occlusion (PVO).

METHODS

In our study, 13 patients diagnosed with PVO were included. Of all 13 patients, two received percutaneous portal vein recanalization (PVR), 10 received PVR and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS), and one underwent intrahepatic portal branch-large collateral vessel shunt.

RESULTS

Interventional approaches were completed in all patients, and the technical success rate was 100%. The portal pressure gradient of patients treated with PVR-TIPS fell from 31 ± 4 to 12 ± 3 mmHg. During the procedures, no life-threatening complications occurred. All the clinical symptoms were effectively controlled after the interventional therapies and all the patients survived during the follow-up, with no rebleeding or overt hepatic encephalopathy. But stent thrombosis occurred in one patient, the cumulative rate of stent patency was 92%.

CONCLUSION

Interventional therapy was proved to be a well tolerated and effective strategy for PVO. For PVO patients without high intrahepatic resistance, if the patient is equipped with available portal inflow tract (superior mesenteric vein or splenic vein) and outflow tract (intrahepatic portal branches), PVR is the first choice; if the outflow tract is completely blocked with only available inflow tract, PVR-TIPS can be considered. For PVO patients with high intrahepatic resistance, as long as there is an available portal inflow tract, PVR-TIPS can be adopted.

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

Purpose

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

Materials and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Level of Evidence

Historically controlled studies, level 4.