[Trends in endovascular treatment and prevention of portal bleeding]

Bleeding from esophageal and gastric varices is a major factor of mortality in patients with portal hypertension. The gold standard for diagnosis of portal hypertension is hepatic venous pressure gradient determining the treatment algorithms and risk of recurrent bleeding. Combination of endoscopic methods and therapy is limited by varix localization and not always effective. In these cases, endovascular bypass and decoupling techniques are preferred. Early endovascular treatment of portal bleeding is effective for hemostasis and higher transplantation-free survival of patients. Early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic bypass should be associated with 8-mm covered stents of controlled dilation. Combination of endovascular techniques reduces the complications of each technique and potentiates their positive effect. Endovascular treatment and prevention of portal bleeding should be determined by anatomical features of portal venous system.

Smaller Diameter and Adjustable Diameter Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts

Complications of overshunting, including hepatic encephalopathy and hepatic insufficiency, remain prevalent following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation. Smaller diameter TIPS may reduce the risk of overshunting, but the use of smaller stents must be weighed against the risk of undershunting and persistent or recurrent hemorrhage, ascites, and other complications of portal hypertension. This article explores the question of optimal shunt diameter by examining outcomes for smaller diameter TIPS stent-grafts (<10 mm), underdilated stent-grafts, and variable diameter stent-grafts.

Shunt-Induced Hepatic Encephalopathy in TIPS: Current Approaches and Clinical Challenges

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an established treatment tool in decompensated liver cirrhosis that has been shown to prolong transplant-free survival. Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a frequent complication of decompensated cirrhosis, eventually induced and/or aggravated by TIPS, that remains a clinical challenge especially in these patients. Therefore, patient selection for TIPS requires careful assessment of risk factors for HE. TIPS procedural parameters regarding stent size and invasive portosystemic pressure gradient measurements thereby have an important role. Endovascular shunt modification, in combination with a conservative medical approach, often results in a significant reduction of symptoms. This review summarizes HE molecular mechanisms and pathophysiology as well as diagnostic and therapeutic approaches targeting shunt-induced HE.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement for Portal Hypertension: Meta-Analysis of Safety and Efficacy of 8 mm vs. 10 mm Stents

Introduction

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement remains a leading adverse event. Controversy remains regarding the optimal stent diameter given that smaller stents may decrease the amount of shunted blood and decrease the risk of HE, but stent patency and/or clinical adequacy of portal decompression may also be affected. We aim to provide meta-analysis-based evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of 8 mm vs. 10 mm stents during TIPS placement.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing 8 mm and 10 mm stents during TIPS placement for portal hypertension decompression in cirrhotic patients. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were prioritized for inclusion. Overall evaluation of quality and bias for each study was performed. The outcomes assessed were the prevalence of HE, rebleeding or failure to control refractory ascites, and overall survival. Subgroup analysis based on TIPS indication was conducted.

Results

Five studies with a total number of 489 cirrhotic patients were identified. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) of post-TIPS HE was significantly lower in patients in the 8 mm stent group than in the 10 mm stent group (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.51~0.92, p value < 0.0001). The combined HR of post-TIPS rebleeding/the need for paracentesis was significantly higher in patients in the 8 mm stent group than in the 10 mm stent group (HR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.22~2.55, p value < 0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in the overall survival between the 8 mm and 10 mm stent groups. The combined risk of HE in the variceal bleeding subgroup was statistically lower (HR: 0.52, CI: 0.34-0.80) with an 8 mm stent compared with a 10 mm stent. The combined risk of both rebleeding/paracentesis and survival was not statistically significant between 8 mm and 10 mm stent use in subgroup analysis.

Conclusion

8 mm stents during TIPS placement are associated with a significant lower risk of HE compared to 10 mm stents (32% decreased risk), as well as a 76% increased risk of rebleeding/paracentesis. Meta-analysis results suggest that there is not one superior stent choice for all clinical scenarios and that the TIPS indication of variceal bleeding or refractory ascites might have different appropriate selection of the shunt diameter.