Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 14, 2014; 20(10): 2704-2714
Published online Mar 14, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i10.2704
Table 3 Technical results of the included studies
Technical resultsLebrec et al[10]Rössle et al[9]Ginès et al[8]Sanyal et al[11]Salerno et al[12]Narahara et al[13]
Successful stent placement (n/randomized)10/13 (77)29/29 (100)34/35 (97)49/52 (94)29/33 (89)30/30 (100)
PSG change, mmHgFrom 20 ± 1 to 14 ± 1From 24 ± 6 to 10 ± 4From 19.1 ± 0.8 to 8.7 ± 0.4From 19.8 ± 4.8 to 8.3 ± 3.6From 22.5 ± 1.1 to 8.7 ± 0.6From 20.3 ± 4.6 to 8.5 ± 4.7
Severe TIPS procedure-related complications1 severe cardiac arrhythmiasNone3 severe hemolytic anemiaNR1 cerebrovascular embolismNone
TIPS dysfunction3/10 (30)13/29 (45)13/34 (38)34/49 (70)12/29 (41)26/30 (87)
Irreversible stent obstruction1/10 (10)2/29 (7)1/34 (3)NR2/29 (7)2/30 (7)
TIPS-assisted patency, (n/randomized)6/13 (46)27/29 (93)32/35 (91)> 90%27/33 (82)26/30 (86)
Patients crossed over from paracentesis to TIPSNR10/31 (32)3/35 (9)2/57 (4)11/33 (33)6/30 (20)
TIPS patency surveillanceDoppler sonographyDoppler sonographyHepatic vein catheterization if ascites recurredAngiographyDoppler sonographyDoppler sonography