Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt by using covered stents of different diameters for the treatment of esophagogastric varices rupture with bleeding
10.3969/j.issn.1008-794X.2018.02.016
- VernacularTitle:不同直径覆膜支架行经颈静脉肝内门体分流术治疗食管胃底静脉曲张破裂出血
- Author:
Hui ZHENG
1
;
Weizhu YANG
;
Ning HUANG
;
Jingyao HUANG
;
Qubin ZHENG
;
Na JIANG
;
Zhengzhong WU
;
Quan SHEN
;
Kun KE
Author Information
1. 350001,福州 福建医科大学附属协和医院介入科
- Keywords:
transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt;
esophagogastric varices;
hemorrhage;
stent diameter
- From:
Journal of Interventional Radiology
2018;27(2):167-171
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To assess the efficacy and safety of different diameter covered stents used in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for esophagogastric varices with bleeding (EGVB). Methods The clinical data of 68 patients with portal hypertension due to cirrhosis, who received TIPS for EGVB during the period from Desember 2010 to February 2015, were retrospectively analyzed. Among the 68 patients, covered stent with diameter of 7mm was used in 30 (small stent group) and covered stent with diameter of 8mm was employed in 38 (big stent group). Using Kaplan-Meier method, the cumulative digestive tract no-rebleeding rate, the patency rate of shunt and the survival rate of both groups were analyzed. Logrank test was used to make comparison between the two groups, and chi-square test was conducted to compare the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy between the two groups. Results The operative success rate was 100％ in 68 patients. The patients were followed up for 0.1-52.3 months, with a mean of (19.4±16.0) months. The 3-, 6-and 12-month cumulative digestive tract no-rebleeding rates were 86.54％, 79.30％ and 74.90％ respectively in the small stent group, which were 91.87％, 85.93％ and 81.63％ respectively in the big stent group, but the differences between the two groups were not statistically significantly (X2=0.05, P=0.83). The 3-, 6-and 12-month cumulative patency rates of shunt in the small stent group were 95.00％, 80.19％ and 70.17％ respectively, which in the big stent group were 96.15％, 91.97％ and 81.07％ respectively, and no statistically significant differences existed between the two groups (X2=0.40, P=0.53). The 3-, 12-, 24-and 48-month cumulative survival rates in the small stent group were 93.33％, 86.67％, 75.11％ and64.38％ respectively, while those in the big stent group were 97.37％, 94.23％, 88.68％ and 76.02％ respectively, and the differences between the two groups were not statistically significantly (X2=2.21, P=0.14). Postoperative hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 15 patients (15/68, 22.06％), the incidences of hepatic encephalopathy in the small stent group and in the big stent group were 20.00％ (6/30) and 23.68％ (9/38) respectively, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significantly (X2=0.13, P=0.72). Conclusion Compared with the use of 7mm covered stent, the use of 8mm covered stent in TIPS neither can improve the curative effect nor can reduce the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy.
