In:
Gut, BMJ, Vol. 67, No. 12 ( 2018-12), p. 2156-2168
Abstract:
Limited data are available on the prevention of variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). This study aimed to compare transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) with covered stents versus endoscopic band ligation (EBL) plus propranolol for the prevention of variceal rebleeding among patients with cirrhosis and PVT. Design Consecutive cirrhotic patients (94% Child-Pugh class A or B) with PVT who had variceal bleeding in the past 6 weeks were randomly assigned to TIPS group (n=24) or EBL plus propranolol group (EBL+drug, n=25), respectively. Primary endpoint was variceal rebleeding. Secondary endpoints included survival, overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE), portal vein recanalisation and rethrombosis, other complications of portal hypertension and adverse events. Results During a median follow-up of 30 months in both groups, variceal rebleeding was significantly less frequent in the TIPS group (15% vs 45% at 1 year and 25% vs 50% at 2 years, respectively; HR=0.28, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.76, p=0.008), with a significantly higher portal vein recanalisation rate (95% vs 70%; p=0.03) and a relatively lower rethrombosis rate (5% vs 33%; p=0.06) compared with the EBL+drug group. There were no statistically significant differences in survival (67% vs 84%; p=0.152), OHE (25% vs 16%; p=0.440), other complications of portal hypertension and adverse events between groups. Conclusion Covered TIPS placement in patients with PVT and moderately decompensated cirrhosis was more effective than EBL combined with propranolol for the prevention of rebleeding, with a higher probability of PVT resolution without increasing the risk of OHE and adverse effects, but this benefit did not translate into improved survival. Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01326949 .
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0017-5749
,
1468-3288
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp1
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp2
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp8
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp3
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp6
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp5
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp4
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp7
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp9
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp10
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp11
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp12
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp13
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp14
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp15
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp16
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp17
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp18
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp19
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp20
DOI:
10.1136/gutjnl-2017-314634.supp21
Language:
English
Publisher:
BMJ
Publication Date:
2018
detail.hit.zdb_id:
1492637-4