Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt vs conservative treatment for recurrent ascites: A propensity score matched comparison

Table 5 Multivariate logistic regressions with interaction terms

Model	Dependent variable	Parameters	Estimate	SE	z value	P value
A		Intercept	-3.8600	0.4340	-8.887	< 2 × 10-16
	In-hospital	MELD-Score	0.0990	0.0180	5.628	1.82 × 10-8
	Mortality (y/n)	TIPS	-1.3570	1.0590	-1.281	0.200
		MELD: TIPS	0.0330	0.0500	0.668	0.504
B		Intercept	-7.1320	0.9810	-7.271	3.56 × 10-13
	In-hospital	Child (points)	0.4880	0.0840	5.814	6.09 × 10-9
	Mortality (y/n)	TIPS	-1.6760	2.2350	-0.750	0.453
		Child: TIPS	0.0934	0.2020	0.463	0.643
C		Intercept	-3.1860	0.3610	-8.824	< 2 × 10-16
	Increase in	MELD	0.1020	0.0160	6.461	1.04 × 10-10
	ACLF grade	TIPS	-0.7780	0.7120	-1.092	0.275
	(y/n)	MELD: TIPS	0.0480	0.0368	1.318	0.187
D		Intercept	-5.2640	0.7480	-7.040	1.93 × 10-12
	Increase in	Child (points)	0.3880	0.0670	5.807	6.37 × 10-9
	ACLF grade	TIPS	-3.1980	1.5300	-2.090	0.0366
	(y/n)	Child: TIPS	0.3190	0.1145	2.191	0.0285

For models C and D death was treated as an increase in acute on chronic liver failure. Models A and B show an effect of only the MELD/Child scores on mortality. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and the interaction of TIPS and MELD/Child scores (MELD: TIPS, Child: TIPS) have no significant influence on mortality (A and B). In model D a significant interaction term Child:TIPS exists. In model C the interaction term MELD: TIPS is not significant, indicating a weaker interaction than in model D. ACLF: Acute on chronic liver failure; TIPS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt.