Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt vs endoscopic therapy in preventing variceal rebleeding

Advanced Search

BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge

Home / Archive / Volume 18, Issue 48

This Article

Citation of this article

Corresponding Author of This Article

Article-Type of This Article

Open-Access Policy of This Article

Times Cited Counts in Google of This Article

Number of Hits and Downloads for This Article

All Articles published online

Item

Count

PDF

431

HTML

3089

Figures (1-1)

167

Tables (1-3)

169

Sum=3856

Dec 28, 2012 (publication date) through Oct 2, 2024

Times Cited of This Article

Journal Information of This Article

Publication Name

World Journal of Gastroenterology

ISSN

1007-9327

Publisher of This Article

Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA

Brief Article

World J Gastroenterol. Dec 28, 2012; 18(48): 7341-7347
Published online Dec 28, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i48.7341

Table 3 Comparison of length of hospital stay and expenses between two groups

	Initial TIPS	Rescue TIPS	Rest of ET
	(64 cases)	(8 cases)	(54 cases)
Average total expense (RMB)	52 678	63 003	35 298
Average length of hospital stay during follow-up (d)	5	20	18
Average number of hospitalization during follow-up	0.4	2.1	1.2

TIPS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt; ET: Endoscopic therapy.

Citation: Xue H, Zhang M, Pang JX, Yan F, Li YC, Lv LS, Yuan J, Palikhe M, Li WZ, Wang ZL. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt vs endoscopic therapy in preventing variceal rebleeding. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18(48): 7341-7347
URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v18/i48/7341.htm
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i48.7341