ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative study of classic Rex shunt and modified Rex shunt in treating portal cavernoma in children.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Endoscopic Hemostasis as a Bridge to Surgical Portal Decompression in Children with Portal Hypertensive Bleeding: A Staged Endoscopic-Surgical Strategy.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To explore the differences in efficacy and underlying reasons between the classic Rex shunt and the modified Rex shunt in treating extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) in children. This retrospective study compared 24 children with portal cavernomas treated at our hospital from July 2022 to March 2024. Twelve patients underwent the classic Rex shunt using an internal jugular vein as a bypass vein, whereas the other twelve patients received the modified Rex shunt involving an inferior mesenteric vein (IMV) to the left portal vein (LPV) shunt. This study compared the operative time, postoperative hospital stay, pre- and postoperative portal pressures, degree of postoperative portal pressure reduction, diameter and length of grafted vein, diameter of vascular anastomosis with the left portal vein, patency rate of the bypass vein, postoperative splenic shrinkage ratio, postoperative hypersplenism relief rate, and incidence of postoperative rebleeding between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences in age at surgery, sex ratio, postoperative hospital stay, or follow-up duration between the two groups. The operative time for the classic Rex shunt was notably longer than that for the modified Rex shunt (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in pre- or postoperative portal pressure, degree of postoperative portal pressure reduction, length of the grafted vein, or diameter of the anastomosis with the LPV between the two groups. However, the diameter of the internal jugular vein was notably larger than that of the IMV (P < 0.001). The diameter of the bypass vein in the patency group was notably greater than that in the occluded group (P < 0.001). Compared with the modified Rex shunt group, the classic Rex shunt group had a greater postoperative hypersplenism relief rate, but this difference was not statistically significant. The patency rate of the bypass vein and the postoperative splenic shrinkage ratio were markedly greater in the classic Rex shunt group than in the modified Rex shunt group (P < 0.05). The classic Rex shunt was more effective based on a higher patency rate and greater relief of splenomegaly and hypersplenism.
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.