ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Machine learning-driven risk stratification to guide variceal embolization in TIPS-treated cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTransjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) combined with variceal embolization (VE) is a therapeutic strategy for cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB). However, the efficacy of this combination remains controversial. This study aimed to develop and validate prediction models to guide treatment decisions for TIPS combined with VE in AVB patients, focusing on predicting rebleeding risk.
methodsThis retrospective study included 1,336 cirrhotic patients with AVB undergoing TIPS with (941 cases) or without VE (395 cases) between January 2010 and June 2020. Patients were divided into training (n = 338), internal validation (n = 146), and external validation (n = 852) cohorts. Data were collected on baseline characteristics, clinical variables, and procedural details. Several machine-learning algorithms were evaluated alongside a multivariable logistic regression (LR) model, with LR demonstrating the best predictive performance. Model performance was assessed using area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) method was used to identify key predictors of rebleeding risk.
resultsRebleeding occurred in 17.74% of patients, with no significant difference between the TIPS alone and TIPS + VE groups (p = 0.946). Shunt dysfunction was more frequent in the TIPS + VE group (p < 0.001). The multivariable logistic regression model had the highest AUC for predicting rebleeding in both internal (AUC = 0.762) and external validation cohorts (AUC = 0.762). It showed a balanced sensitivity and specificity across validation cohorts. SHAP analysis identified key predictors, including creatinine, Child-Pugh class, and international normalized ratio. High-risk patients identified by the LR model benefited from TIPS + VE (p = 0.018), while low-risk patients saw no additional benefit.
conclusionThe LR model effectively stratified TIPS patients into high- and low-risk groups for post-procedural rebleeding, providing a useful tool to guide personalized treatment decisions for cirrhotic patients undergoing TIPS with or without VE. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The LR-based model enables individualized treatment decisions by identifying AVB patients most likely to benefit from TIPS combined with variceal embolization, thereby optimizing therapeutic outcomes and avoiding unnecessary interventions.
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.