ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2022
Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of clinical outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for refractory ascites and recurrent nonrefractory ascites.World journal of hepatology · 2025Article
- Should transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt be first-line therapy for preventing esophageal variceal rebleeding? A meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement is an effective intervention for recurrent tense ascites. Some studies show an increased risk of acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) associated with TIPS placement. It is not clear whether ACLF in this context is a consequence of TIPS or of the pre-existing liver disease.
aimTo better understand the risks of TIPS in this challenging setting and to compare them with those of conservative therapy.
methodsTwo hundred and fourteen patients undergoing their first TIPS placement for recurrent tense ascites at our tertiary-care center between 2007 and 2017 were identified (TIPS group). Three hundred and ninety-eight patients of the same time interval with liver cirrhosis and recurrent tense ascites not undergoing TIPS placement (No TIPS group) were analyzed as a control group. TIPS indication, diagnosis of recurrent ascites, further diagnoses and clinical findings were obtained from a database search and patient records. The in-hospital mortality and ACLF incidence of both groups were compared using 1:1 propensity score matching and multivariate logistic regressions.
resultsAfter propensity score matching, the TIPS and No TIPS groups were comparable in terms of laboratory values and ACLF incidence at hospital admission. There was no detectable difference in mortality (TIPS: 11/214, No TIPS 13/214). During the hospital stay, ACLF occurred more frequently in the TIPS group than in the No TIPS group (TIPS: 70/214, No TIPS: 57/214,
conclusionTIPS placement for recurrent tense ascites is associated with an increased rate of ACLF in patients with severely impaired liver function but does not result in higher in-hospital mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.