Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2026
Expandable Constrained Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt: An Individualised Approach for High-Risk Patients?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rieland Hannah, Meine Timo C, Tiede Anja, Mauz Jim B, Wedemeyer Heiner, Hinrichs Jan B, Wacker Frank K, Maasoumy Benjamin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) can effectively overcome portal hypertension, but is prevented by contraindications in a considerable proportion of patients. In this study, we investigated the option of a constrained TIPS (cTIPS) with reduced diameter for high-risk patients.
METHODS: Elective cTIPS were placed in 60 high-risk patients at Hannover Medical School (10/2020-04/2023). In the cTIPS procedure, a 6 mm stent(-graft) was inserted first into the intrahepatic tract to constrain the TIPS endoprosthesis. Procedural data, complications and 12 months follow-up were recorded. A control cohort of patients with standard TIPS (sTIPS) was generated using propensity score matching, resulting in 40 patients per group.
RESULTS: Indications for cTIPS were cardiac impairment, poor liver function and/or history of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) in 22, 17 and 8 patients, respectively. cTIPS was technically successful in all patients. Portosystemic gradient (PSG) was successfully lowered in both groups (sTIPS: median 60% reduction and cTIPS: median 50% reduction from an initial PSG of 15 mmHg in both groups, p = 0.006), while post-TIPS PSG remained higher in the cTIPS group compared to the sTIPS group (cTIPS: median 7 mmHg vs. sTIPS: median 6 mmHg; p = 0.042). TIPS dysfunction and revision were significantly more frequent in the cTIPS cohort than in the sTIPS cohort (sTIPS: 1 vs. cTIPS: 9; p = 0.014 and sTIPS: 7 vs. cTIPS: 13; p = 0.036). Control of portal hypertensive symptoms (no paracentesis, no bleeding) was similar in both groups (p = 0.267), but overt HE was less frequent in the cTIPS group than in the sTIPS group (sTIPS: 14 vs. cTIPS: 4; p = 0.042).
CONCLUSION: The constrained TIPS may offer a more careful step-up approach for selected high-risk TIPS patients. The technical procedure appears to be safe and feasible, however the risk for thrombosis and therefore needed revisions is increased. Larger study cohorts are needed to further explore promising results.
METHODS: Elective cTIPS were placed in 60 high-risk patients at Hannover Medical School (10/2020-04/2023). In the cTIPS procedure, a 6 mm stent(-graft) was inserted first into the intrahepatic tract to constrain the TIPS endoprosthesis. Procedural data, complications and 12 months follow-up were recorded. A control cohort of patients with standard TIPS (sTIPS) was generated using propensity score matching, resulting in 40 patients per group.
RESULTS: Indications for cTIPS were cardiac impairment, poor liver function and/or history of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) in 22, 17 and 8 patients, respectively. cTIPS was technically successful in all patients. Portosystemic gradient (PSG) was successfully lowered in both groups (sTIPS: median 60% reduction and cTIPS: median 50% reduction from an initial PSG of 15 mmHg in both groups, p = 0.006), while post-TIPS PSG remained higher in the cTIPS group compared to the sTIPS group (cTIPS: median 7 mmHg vs. sTIPS: median 6 mmHg; p = 0.042). TIPS dysfunction and revision were significantly more frequent in the cTIPS cohort than in the sTIPS cohort (sTIPS: 1 vs. cTIPS: 9; p = 0.014 and sTIPS: 7 vs. cTIPS: 13; p = 0.036). Control of portal hypertensive symptoms (no paracentesis, no bleeding) was similar in both groups (p = 0.267), but overt HE was less frequent in the cTIPS group than in the sTIPS group (sTIPS: 14 vs. cTIPS: 4; p = 0.042).
CONCLUSION: The constrained TIPS may offer a more careful step-up approach for selected high-risk TIPS patients. The technical procedure appears to be safe and feasible, however the risk for thrombosis and therefore needed revisions is increased. Larger study cohorts are needed to further explore promising results.