Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30913064›Full record

SynthesisChinese medical journal2019

Comparision between portosystemic shunts and endoscopic therapy for prevention of variceal re-bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Guang-Peng Zhou, Li-Ying Sun, Lin Wei, Wei Qu, Zhi-Gui Zeng, Ying Liu, Yi-Zhou Jiang, Zhi-Jun Zhu

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Chinese medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Evidence for preventing EVRB in cirrhotic patients: A systematic review.Biomedical papers of the Medical Faculty of the University Palacky, Olomouc, Czechoslovakia · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Current Indications and Long-Term Outcomes of Surgical Portosystemic Shunts in Adults.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Guang-Peng ZhouLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Li-Ying SunLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Lin WeiLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Wei QuLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Zhi-Gui ZengLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Ying LiuLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Yi-Zhou JiangLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Zhi-Jun ZhuLiver Transplantation Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100005, China.
Beijing Friendship Hospital · CNCapital Medical University · CNNational Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPortosystemic 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.

methodsUsing 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.

resultsTwenty-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).

conclusionsThe 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.

Indexed as

Confidence IntervalsEsophageal and Gastric VaricesGastrointestinal HemorrhageHumansPortasystemic Shunt, Transjugular IntrahepaticRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID30913064
PMCPMC6595870
OpenAlexW2922631637

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.