Rate, reasons, predictors, and burden of readmissions after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Nationwide data on readmissions after the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure are lacking. We aimed to investigate the 30-day readmission rate after TIPS procedure, reasons, and predictors for readmissions and its impact on resource utilization and mortality in the USA. METHODS: We identified all adults who underwent an inpatient TIPS procedure between 2010 and 2014 using the National Readmission Database. Outcomes included all-cause 30-day readmission rate, reasons and predictors of readmissions, mortality rate, and mean hospitalization charges. RESULTS: Out of a total of 31 230 hospitalizations with TIPS procedure, 28 021 patients met the study criteria and were finally included. The mean age of patients was 56.90 years, and 63.84% were men. All-cause 30-day readmission rate was 27.81%. Hepatic encephalopathy with or without coma was the most common reason for readmissions in at least 36.43% patients. The in-hospital mortality for index hospitalization and 30-day readmission was 10.69% and 5.85%, respectively. The mean hospitalization charges for index hospitalization and readmissions were $153 357 and $45 751, respectively. Advanced age, Medicaid insurance, higher Charlson comorbidy index, ascites as indication of TIPS, and nonspecific or hepatitis C cirrhosis etiologies for cirrhosis were found to be independent predictors of 30-day readmissions after a TIPS procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found a high rate of readmission for patients undergoing TIPS procedure, and the majority of these readmissions were related to hepatic encephalopathy. Further studies highlighting areas for improvement, particularly for patient selection and post-discharge care, are needed to reduce readmissions.

Cost-Effectiveness of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt versus Large-Volume Paracentesis in Refractory Ascites: Results of a Markov Model Incorporating Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis and Nationally Representative Cost Data.

PURPOSE: To compare relative cost-effectiveness of serial large-volume paracentesis (LVP) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation for treatment of refractory ascites. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decisional Markov model was developed to estimate payer cost and quality-adjusted life-ears (QALYs) associated with LVP and TIPS treatment strategies for cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites. Survival estimates were derived from an individual patient-level meta-analysis of prospective randomized clinical trials. Health utilities for potential health states were derived from a prospective study of patients with cirrhosis. Cost data were derived from national representative claims databases (MarketScan and Medicare) and included reimbursement amounts for relevant procedures, hospitalizations, and outpatient pharmaceutical costs. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: LVP resulted in 1.72 QALYs gained at a cost of $41,391, whereas TIPS resulted in 2.76 QALYs gained at a cost of $100,538. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of TIPS versus LVP was $57,003/QALY. At a willingness-to-pay ratio of $100,000/QALY, TIPS has a 62% probability of being acceptable compared with LVP. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that TIPS should be considered cost-effective in a country that places a relatively high value on health improvements but less so in countries with lower levels of health care resources.

Cost Effectiveness of Early Insertion of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts for Recurrent Ascites.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Treatment options for recurrent ascites resulting from decompensated cirrhosis include serial large-volume paracentesis and albumin infusion (LVP+A) or insertion of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Insertion of TIPSs with covered stents during early stages of ascites (early TIPS, defined as 2 LVPs within the past 3 weeks and <6 LVPs in the prior 3 months) significantly improves chances of survival and reduces complications of cirrhosis compared with LVP+A. However, it is not clear if TIPS insertion is cost effective in these patients. METHODS: We developed a Markov model using the payer perspective for a hypothetical cohort of patients with cirrhosis with recurrent ascites receiving early TIPSs or LVP+A using data from publications and national databases collected from 2012 to 2018. Projected outcomes included quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), costs (2017 US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; $/QALY). Sensitivity analyses (1-way, 2-way, and probabilistic) were conducted. ICERs less than $100,000 per QALY were considered cost effective. RESULTS: In base-case analysis, early insertion of TIPS had a higher cost ($22,770) than LVP+A ($19,180), but also increased QALY (0.73 for early TIPSs and 0.65 for LVP+A), resulting in an ICER of $46,310/QALY. Results were sensitive to cost of uncomplicated TIPS insertion and transplant, need for LVP+A, probability of transplant, and decompensated QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, TIPS insertion was the optimal strategy in 59.1% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: Based on Markov model analysis, early placement of TIPSs appears to be a cost-effective strategy for management of specific patients with cirrhosis and recurrent ascites. TIPS placement should be considered early and as a first-line treatment option for select patients.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization for portal hypertension with recurrent variceal bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization (OSED) are widely used to treat patients with portal hypertension and recurrent variceal bleeding (PHRVB). This study aimed to compare the effectiveness between TIPS and OSED for the treatment of PHRVB. METHODS: The data were retrospectively retrieved from 479 cirrhotic patients (Child-Pugh A or B class) with PHRVB, who had undergone TIPS (TIPS group) or OSED (OSED group) between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2014. RESULTS: A total of 196 patients received TIPS, whereas 283 underwent OSED. Within one month after TIPS and OSED, the rebleeding rates were 6.1% and 3.2%, respectively (P=0.122). Significantly lower incidence of pleural effusion, splenic vein thrombosis, and pulmonary infection, as well as higher hepatic encephalopathy rate, shorter postoperative length of hospital stay, and higher hospital costs were observed in the TIPS group than those in the OSED group. During the follow-up periods (29 months), significantly higher incidences of rebleeding (15.3% vs 4.6%, P=0.001) and hepatic encephalopathy (17.3% vs 3.9%, P=0.001) were observed in the TIPS group than in the OSED group. The incidence of in-stent stenosis was 18.9%. The survival rates were 91.3% in the TIPS group and 95.1% in the OSED group. The long-term liver function did not worsen after either TIPS or OSED. CONCLUSION: For the patients with liver function in the Child-Pugh A or B class, TIPS is not superior over OSED in terms of PHRVB treatment and rebleeding prevention.

Inpatient Cost Assessment of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the USA from 2001 to 2012.

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for treatment of portal hypertension, a paucity of nationwide data exists on predictors of the economic impact related to TIPS. AIMS: Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from 2001 to 2012, we aimed to evaluate factors contributing to hospital cost of patients admitted to US hospitals for TIPS. METHODS: Using the NIS, we identified a discharge-weighted national estimate of 61,004 TIPS procedures from 2001 to 2012. Through independent sample analysis, we determined profile factors related to increases in hospital costs. RESULTS: Of all TIPS cases, the mean charge adjusted for inflation to the year 2012 is $125,044 ± $160,115. The mean hospital cost adjusted for inflation is $44,901 ± $54,565. Comparing pre- and post-2005, mean charges and cost have increased considerably ($98,154 vs. $142,652, p < 0.001 and $41,656 vs. $46,453, p < 0.001, respectively). Patients transferred from a different hospital, weekend admissions, Asian/Pacific Islander patients, and hospitals in the Northeastern and Western region had higher cost. Number of diagnoses and number of procedures show positive correlations with hospital cost, with number of procedures exhibiting stronger relationships (Pearson 0.613). Comorbidity measures with highest increases in cost were pulmonary circulation disorders ($32,157 increase, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The cost of the TIPS procedure is gradually rising for hospitals. Alongside recent healthcare reform through the Affordable Care Act, measures to reduce the economic burden of TIPS are of increasing importance. Data from this study are intended to aid physicians and hospitals in identifying improvements that could reduce hospital costs.

Economic modelling of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt insertion for acute variceal haemorrhage.

INTRODUCTION: Early insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in high-risk patients with acute variceal haemorrhage reduces rebleeding and mortality. However, the economic benefit of utilizing this approach remains unclear. We evaluated the economic implications of introducing early TIPS into routine algorithms for the management of variceal bleeding. METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted in 2009 with variceal haemorrhage to two liver units and eligible for early TIPS insertion were identified retrospectively. The costs of a 12-month follow-up from index bleeding admission were calculated--the actual cost of follow-up and rebleeding in this cohort was compared with the theoretical 12-month follow-up costs of instead inserting an early TIPS at index admission. Our findings were subjected to a sensitivity analysis to assess the cost effectiveness of early TIPS insertion compared with standard care. RESULTS: In 2009, 78 patients were admitted to our units with variceal haemorrhage; 27 patients (35%) were eligible for early TIPS insertion. The actual cost of a 12-month follow-up was £138 473.50. Early TIPS insertion, assuming a 3.2% rebleeding rate, would save £534.70 per patient per year (P<0.0001). On sensitivity analysis, early TIPS dominated standard care up to an early TIPS rebleeding rate of 6% and remained cost-effective up to a rebleeding rate of 12%. CONCLUSION: Early TIPS insertion for high-risk patients with acute variceal bleeding is a cost-efficient intervention. This has important implications for the introduction of early TIPS as standard care and the organization of interventional radiology services.

Cost-effective analysis of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus surgical portacaval shunt for variceal bleeding in early cirrhosis.

Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage carries significant morbidity and mortality in patients with portal hypertension and cirrhosis. The optimal prevention strategy for rebleeding in these patients remains controversial with respect to the safety and efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) versus a portocaval surgical shunt (PC). We sought to determine the long-term cost-effectiveness of these two treatments. A Markov state transition decision analysis was created and Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis performed to follow patients with early cirrhosis who have an upper gastrointestinal bleed despite medical therapy into either TIPS or PC. Patients were followed throughout the transition states until either death or survival. Probabilities of gastrointestinal rebleed, hepatic encephalopathy, surgical and TIPS-related complications as well as death were obtained from an extensive literature review. Costs were derived from average Medicare reimbursements. The main outcome was dollars per life-year saved. For patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis with upper gastrointestinal variceal bleed, the average cost per life year saved was $17,771 (SD = 471) and $21,438 (SD = 308) for TIPS and PC, respectively. The average life expectancy was 5.0 years and 7.0 years for TIPS and PC, respectively. This yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness rate for portocaval shunt of $3,299 per life year saved. Compared with TIPS, surgical PC shunt resulted in improved survival with minimal increase in cost. Therefore, given the low incremental cost of PC, it should be adopted as a cost-effective strategy in managing this patient population.

Impact of hospital and surgeon volumes in the management of complicated portal hypertension: review of a statewide database in Florida.

Mortality after complex surgical procedures has been shown to be inversely related to hospital volume. The purpose of this study was to determine whether these findings are applicable to radiologic and surgical procedures for complicated portal hypertension. The Agency for Healthcare Administration for the State of Florida database was queried to determine outcomes after transjugular intrahepatic stent shunts (TIPS) or surgical shunts from 2000 to 2003. A total of 1486 patients underwent either TIPS (1321) or surgical shunts (165). Natural breakpoints occurred at two and six procedures per year were correlated with survival for surgical shunts but not TIPS. Overall mortality was not different between TIPS and surgical shunts (11.0 vs. 12.7%, P = 0.51); however, the cost of TIPS was significantly lower (62,000 +/- 58.5 vs. 107,000 +/- 97.8, P < 0.001) as well as the length of hospitalization (9 +/- 9.0 days vs. 15 days +/- 12.6 days, P < 0.001). Surgical procedures for complicated portal hypertension are rapidly being replaced by TIPS. Like with other complex procedures, outcomes are related to hospital volume.

Outcomes of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt through the left branch vs. the right branch of the portal vein in advanced cirrhosis: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is technically divided into TIPS through the left branch of the portal vein (TIPS-LBPV) and TIPS through the right branch of the portal vein (TIPS-RBPV). In order to compare their advantages and disadvantages, this randomized, controlled trial was designed to investigate their outcomes in advanced cirrhotic patients. METHODS: Seventy-two patients were randomly placed into TIPS-LBPV (36 patients) and TIPS-RBPV (36 patients, with four failures) groups, and they were prospectively followed for 2 years after TIPS implantation. RESULTS: Patients who underwent the two different kinds of TIPS were balanced during recruitment for this study. The incidences of overall encephalopathy and de novo encephalopathy in the TIPS-LBPV group were significantly lower than that of the TIPS-RBPV group during follow-up (P=0.036 and 0.012 respectively). The incidences of rebleeding or re-intervention and improvement of ascites were similar between groups (P>0.05). Patients undergoing TIPS-RBPV required more rehospitalization and incurred more costs than those who underwent TIPS-LBPV (P=0.030 and 0.039 respectively). There was no significant difference between the two groups in survival based on a survival curve constructed according to the Kaplan-Meier method (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing TIPS-LBPV had a lower incidence of encephalopathy, less rehospitalization and lower costs after TIPS implantation compared with patients undergoing TIPS-RBPV.

Cost of preventing variceal rebleeding with transjugular intrahepatic portal systemic shunt and distal splenorenal shunt.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We examined the cost and cost effectiveness of distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. METHODS: Patients participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing DSRS to TIPS. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using SF-36 preceding randomization and yearly thereafter. Cost utility analysis was performed using TreeAge DATA. Costs for both in- and out-patient events and interventions were obtained for each patient. Costs using coated stents were estimated using different rates of stenosis. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were determined at 1, 3 and 5 years. RESULTS: The average yearly costs of managing patients after TIPS and DSRS over 5 years were similar, $16,363 and $13,492, respectively. Cost of TIPS for surviving patients exceeded the cost of DSRS at years 3 and 5 but not significantly. ICERs per life saved favored TIPS at year 5 ($61,000). If coated rather than bare stents were used the cost effectiveness of TIPS increased slightly. CONCLUSIONS: TIPS is as effective as DSRS in preventing variceal rebleeding and may be more cost effective. TIPS, in all aspects, is equal to DSRS in the prevention of variceal rebleeding in patients who are medical failures.

Review article: the burden of hepatic encephalopathy.

Hepatic encephalopathy, a challenging complication of advanced liver disease, occurs in approximately 30-45% of patients with cirrhosis and 10-50% of patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, while minimal hepatic encephalopathy affects approximately 20-60% of patients with liver disease. Although the total direct and indirect costs of hepatic encephalopathy have not been formally quantified, data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project suggest that hepatic encephalopathy-related hospitalizations are associated with substantial costs. In 2003, there were over 40 000 patients hospitalized in the United States for a primary diagnosis of hepatic encephalopathy, resulting in total charges of approximately $932 million. Furthermore, trends over the past 10 years suggest that the burden of hepatic encephalopathy is increasing, as indicated by increases in hospital admissions and higher charges per stay. Because of inconsistencies in coding for hepatic encephalopathy, the prevalence and cost data from this data source are believed to significantly underestimate the true burden of hepatic encephalopathy. In addition, expenditures for physician fees and out-patient care, as well as indirect costs attributable to lost work days and decreased productivity, have not been quantified. Thus, there is need for future studies to more accurately define the burden of hepatic encephalopathy, including minimal hepatic encephalopathy.

A cost-utility analysis of secondary prophylaxis for variceal hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Secondary prophylaxis for esophageal variceal hemorrhage (VH) is recommended, but there has never been a cost-utility analysis of its implementation. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to compare the cost utility of various strategies for the secondary prophylaxis of VH including (a) observation alone, (b) medical therapy (MED), (c) endoscopic band ligation (EBL), (d) endoscopic band ligation plus medical therapy (EBL + M), and (e) transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and to examine the effect of adherence on these strategies. METHODS: A Markov model was developed for all five strategies, and included surveillance, risk of hepatic encephalopathy, complications, and nonadherence. DATA SOURCES: Published literature and the Health Care Financing Administration. TARGET POPULATION: People with cirrhosis and a history of controlled VH. TIME HORIZON: Three years. PERSPECTIVE: Third-party payer. OUTCOME MEASURES: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Combination EBL + M was the optimal strategy, dominating all other strategies including observation, meaning that it was more effective and less expensive than the others. In addition, EBL alone dominated observation and TIPS in terms of QALYs, and MED alone dominated the strategy of observation in terms of QALYs. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Important variables affecting the optimal strategy were the odds ratio (OR) of VH with EBL compared to MED, the OR of VH with EBL + M compared to EBL, and patients' preferences regarding taking the medication as reflected in the associated toll exacted on the health state utility. Variations in these parameters within the range of clinical plausibility allowed EBL or MED to become the optimal strategy. TIPS was the optimal strategy only if adherence rates for all strategies were less than 12%. RESULTS OF MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS: Neither observation nor TIPS was ever the optimal strategy, and EBL + M was optimal in 62% of cases. If the variables identified in the sensitivity analysis were controlled, then EBL + M was optimal in 95% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: TIPS should be reserved only for patients with very poor adherence. Otherwise, patients are best served by medications, EBL, or a combination of both, depending on the comparative rates of rebleeding with each and patients' preferences regarding medical therapy. The redundancy of combination band ligation plus medical therapy can improve outcomes, particularly in the setting of poor patient adherence.

Randomised controlled trial of long term portographic follow up versus variceal band ligation following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt for preventing oesophageal variceal rebleeding.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPSS) is effective in the prevention of variceal rebleeding but requires invasive portographic follow up. This randomised controlled trial aims to test the hypothesis that combining variceal band ligation (VBL) with TIPSS can obviate the need for long term TIPSS surveillance without compromising clinical efficacy, and can reduce the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy. PATIENTS/METHODS: Patients who required TIPSS for the prevention of oesophageal variceal rebleeding were randomised to either TIPSS alone (n = 39, group 1) or TIPSS plus VBL (n = 40, group 2). In group 1, patients underwent long term TIPSS angiographic surveillance. In group 2, patients entered a banding programme with TIPSS surveillance only continued for up to one year. RESULTS: There was a tendency to higher variceal rebleeding in group 2 although this did not reach statistical significance (8% v 15%; relative hazard 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-2.33; p = 0.440). Mortality (47% v 40%; relative hazard 1.31; 95% CI 0.66-2.61; p = 0.434) was similar in the two groups. Hepatic encephalopathy was significantly less in group 2 (20% v 39%; relative hazard 2.63; 95% CI 1.11-6.25; p = 0.023). Hepatic encephalopathy was not statistically different after correcting for sex and portal pressure gradient (p = 0.136). CONCLUSIONS: TIPSS plus VBL without long term surveillance is effective in preventing oesophageal variceal rebleeding, and has the potential for low rates of encephalopathy. Therefore, VBL with short term TIPSS surveillance is a suitable alternative to long term TIPSS surveillance in the prevention of oesophageal variceal rebleeding.

Cost-effectiveness of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (histoacryl) glue injections versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in the management of acute gastric variceal bleeding.

UNLABELLED: The management of bleeding gastric varices has not been standardized. Although transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is used in most centers, endoscopic treatment with N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (cyanoacrylate) glue has recently been shown to be effective. Cost-effectiveness analyses of these methods are lacking. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with bleeding gastric varices treated either by TIPS or cyanoacrylate glue injection. Economic analysis was based on direct costs for a fixed financial year. The two groups were compared for a period of 6 months follow-up, to liver transplantation, or death for each patient. RESULTS: Between January, 1995 and December, 1999, 20 patients with bleeding gastric varices had TIPS; 23 patients had cyanoacrylate glue injection from January, 2000 to October, 2001. There were no significant differences between the two groups in patient characteristics, transfusion requirement, and gastric variceal anatomy. In the TIPS group, 15/20 patients had the procedure performed within 24 h of hemorrhage, and 90% of stent insertions were successful. Complications consisted of two cases of pulmonary edema, two cases of severe encephalopathy, and a 15% stenosis rate at 6 months. In the glue group, there were 3 +/- 1.5 endoscopies and 2 +/- 1 injections per patient, with a 96% initial hemostasis. There was one case of (glue) pulmonary embolism and one blocked front endoscope lens, which required repair. The initial rebleed rate was significantly lower in patients who had TIPS (15% vs 30%, p = 0.005). The inpatient stay was shorter in the glue group (13 +/- 1 vs 18 +/- 2 days, p = 0.05), but there was no difference in the overall mortality rate. The median cost within 6 months of initial gastric variceal bleeding was $4,138 US dollars ($3,009-$8,290 US dollars) for glue versus $11,906 US dollars ($8,200-$16,770 US dollars) for TIPS (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In this comparable group of patients, cyanoacrylate glue injection was more cost effective than TIPS in the management of acute gastric variceal bleeding. A prospective, randomized trial would be required to confirm our analysis.

[Economical analyses in interventional radiology]. / Okonomische Analysen in der Interventionellen Radiologie.

Considerations about the relation between benefit and expenses are also gaining increasing importance in interventional radiology. This review aims at providing a survey about the published data concerning economical analyses of some of the more frequently employed interventions in radiology excluding neuroradiological and coronary interventions. Because of the relative scarcity of literature in this field, all identified articles (n = 46) were included without selection for methodological quality. For a number of radiological interventions the cost-effectiveness has already been demonstrated, e. g., PTA of femoropopliteal and iliac artery stenoses, stenting of renal artery stenoses, placement of vena-cava filters, as well as metal stents in malignant biliary and esophageal obstructions. Conflicting data exist for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. So far, no analysis could be found that directly compares bypass surgery versus PTA + stent in iliac arteries.

Transjugular intrahepatic portasystemic shunt vs surgical shunt in good-risk cirrhotic patients: a case-control comparison.

HYPOTHESIS: In good-risk patients with variceal bleeding undergoing portal decompression, surgical shunt is more effective, more durable, and less costly than angiographic shunt (transjugular intrahepatic portasystemic shunt [TIPS]). DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. SETTING: Academic referral center for liver disease. PATIENTS: Patients with Child-Pugh class A or B cirrhosis with at least 1 prior episode of bleeding from portal hypertension (gastroesophageal varices, portal hypertensive gastropathy). INTERVENTION: Portal decompression by angiographic (TIPS) or surgical (portacaval, distal splenorenal) shunt. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thirty-day and long-term mortality, postintervention diagnostic procedures (endoscopic, ultrasonographic, and angiographic studies), hospital readmissions, variceal rebleeding episodes, blood transfusions, shunt revisions, and hospital and professional charges. RESULTS: Patients with Child-Pugh class A or B cirrhosis undergoing TIPS (n = 20) or surgical shunt (n = 20) were followed up for 385 and 456 patient-months, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was greater following TIPS compared with surgical shunt (20% vs 0%; P =.20); long-term mortality did not differ. Significantly more rebleeding episodes (P<.001); rehospitalizations (P<.05); diagnostic studies of all types (P<.001); shunt revisions (P<.001); and hospital (P<.005), professional (P<.05), and total (P<. 005) charges occurred following TIPS compared with surgical shunt. CONCLUSIONS: Operative portal decompression is more effective, more durable, and less costly than TIPS in Child-Pugh class A and B cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding. Good-risk patients with portal hypertensive bleeding should be referred for surgical shunt.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) versus endoscopic therapy for the prevention of recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding.

For the prevention of recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding, studies show that patients treated with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) have lower rebleeding rates compared with endoscopic therapy. However, TIPS is associated with higher rates of portosystemic encephalopathy and possibly higher costs. The aim of this study was to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing TIPS with endoscopic sclerotherapy and endoscopic ligation for the prevention of recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding. Data for rates of rebleeding, death, complications, and crossover from endoscopy to TIPS were obtained from the literature. Costs for procedures and hospitalizations were obtained from two medical centers. Sensitivity analyses were performed varying probabilities of key variables. The patient population consisted of a hypothetical cohort of cirrhotic patients successfully treated for esophageal variceal bleeding with endoscopic sclerotherapy who received prophylactic sclerotherapy, ligation, or TIPS over 1 year. Endoscopic patients would receive propranolol. Mortality was similar for the three groups. The number of bleeds per patient for sclerotherapy, ligation, and TIPS would be 0.39, 0.32, and 0.07, respectively. The total annual costs per patient for sclerotherapy, ligation, and TIPS were $23,459, $23,111, and $26,275, respectively. The incremental cost per bleed prevented for TIPS compared with sclerotherapy and ligation was $8,803 and $12, 660, respectively. The incremental cost per bleed prevented for TIPS compared with sclerotherapy or ligation was sensitive to the cost of TIPS and the TIPS stenosis rate. Ligation had lower costs and lower recurrent bleeding rates than sclerotherapy. Compared with endoscopic therapy, TIPS leads to lower recurrent variceal bleeding rates and it is more cost effective in the short term for the prevention of recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding.