Outcomes of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt and Gastric Coronary Vein Embolization for Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension.

Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) combined with gastric coronary vein embolization (GCVE) for cirrhotic portal hypertensive variceal bleeding and compare outcomes of first-line with second-line treatment, coil with glue, and single-covered with double stents.Methods: Fifteen patients received TIPS plus GCVE as the first-line treatment for secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, and 45 received it as second-line treatment. Preoperative and postoperative quantitative variables were compared using a paired t test. The incidence of survival rate, re-bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, and shunt dysfunction were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.Results: The portal venous pressure was significantly decreased from 39.0 ± 5.0 mm Hg to 22.5 ± 4.4 mm Hg (P≤0.001) after TIPS treatment. After 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months re-bleeding rates were 1.6%, 3.3%, 6.6%, 13.3%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. Shunt dysfunction rates were 5%, 0%, 10%, 16.6%, 1.6%, and 5%, respectively. Hepatic encephalopathy rates were 3.3%, 1.6%, 3.3%, 6.6%, 0%, and 0%, respectively. And survival rates were 100%, 100%, 100%, 96.6%, 93.3%, and 88.3% respectively. In comparative analysis, statistically significant differences were seen in re-bleeding between the first-line and second-line treatment groups (26.6% vs 24.4%, log-rank P=0.012), and survival rates between single-covered and double stent (3.7% vs 16.1%, log-rang (P=0.043).Conclusion: The results suggest that TIPS combined with GCVE is effective and safer in the treatment of cirrhotic portal hypertensive variceal bleeding. The use of TIP plus GCVE as first-line treatment, may be preferable for high-risk re-bleeding, and more than 25 mm Hg portal venous pressure with repeated variceal bleeding. However, the sample size was small. Therefore, large, randomized, controlled, multidisciplinary center studies are needed for further evaluation.

Survival and clinical success of endovascular intervention in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome: A systematic review.

Budd-Chiari syndrome is a complex clinical disorder of hepatic venous outflow obstruction, originating from the accessory hepatic vein (HV), large HV, and suprahepatic inferior vena cava (IVC). This disorder includes both HV and IVC obstructions and hepatopathy. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the survival rate and clinical success of different types of endovascular treatments for Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS). All participant studies were retrieved from four databases and selected according to the eligibility criteria for systematic review of patients with BCS. The survival rate, clinical success of endovascular treatments in BCS, and survival rates at 1 and 5 years of publication year were calculated accordingly. A total of 3398 patients underwent an endovascular operation; among them, 93.6% showed clinical improvement after initial endovascular treatment. The median clinical success rates for recanalization, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and combined procedures were 51%, 17.50%, and 52.50%, respectively. The median survival rates at 1 and 5 years were 51% and 51% for recanalization, 17.50% and 16% for TIPS, and 52.50% and 49.50% for combined treatment, respectively. Based on the year of publication, the median survival rates at 1 and 5 years were 23.50% and 22.50% before 2000, 41% and 41% in 2000‒2005, 35% and 35% in 2006‒2010, 51% and 48.50% in 2010‒2015, and 56% and 55.50% after 2015, respectively. Our findings indicate that the median survival rate at 1 and 5 years of recanalization treatment is higher than that of TIPS treatment, and recanalization provides better clinical improvement. The publication year findings strongly suggest progressive improvements in interventional endovascular therapy for BCS. Thus, interventional therapy restoring the physiologic hepatic venous outflow of the liver can be considered as the treatment of choice for patients with BCS which is a physiological modification procedure.

Evaluation of outcome from endovascular therapy for Budd-Chiari syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This study was performed to evaluate the outcome of endovascular intervention therapy for Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) and compare recanalization, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)/direct intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (DIPS), and combined procedure treatment. For the meta-analysis, 71 studies were identified by searching four databases. The individual studies' samples were used to calculate a confidence interval (CI 95%), and data were pooled using a fixed-effect model and random effect model. The pooled measure and an equal-weighted average rate were calculated in all participant studies. Heterogeneity between the studies was assessed with I2, and T2 tests, and publication bias was estimated using Egger's regression test. A total of 4,407 BCS patients had undergone an endovascular intervention procedure. The pooled results were 98.9% (95% CI 97.8‒98.9%) for a technical success operation, and 96.9% (95% CI 94.9‒98.9%) for a clinical success operation. The re-intervention rate after the initial intervention procedure was 18.9% (95% CI 14.7‒22.9%), and the survival rates at 1 and 5 years after the initial intervention procedure were 98.9% (95% CI 96.8‒98.9%) and 94.9% (95% CI 92.9‒96.9%), respectively. Patients receiving recanalization treatment (98%) had a better prognosis than those with a combined procedure (95.6%) and TIPS/DIPS treatment (94.5%). The systematic review and meta-analysis further solidify the role of endovascular intervention treatment in BCS as safe and effective. It maintains high technical and clinical success and long-term survival rates. The recanalization treatment had a better prognosis and outcome than the combined procedures and TIPS/DIPS treatment.

Brachytherapy Drainage Catheter and Chemotherapy for Unresectable Pancreatic Carcinoma Combined with Obstructive Jaundice.

Background: Most patients with advanced pancreatic cancer do not have the chance to undergo surgery or chemotherapy because of their poor conditions. Biliary drainage is a palliative treatment to restore liver function and alleviate jaundice, but most patients still face the risk of biliary obstruction in the short term after operation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of brachytherapy drainage catheter (BDC)-combined chemotherapy in the treatment of pancreatic cancer complicated with obstructive jaundice. Patients and Methods: From November 2017 and May 2019, 48 patients underwent the BDC or conventional drainage catheter (CDC) intervention with chemotherapy. The outcomes/endpoints analyzed were technical and clinical success, early complications, stent patency period, and survival. Results: The technical and clinical success rates in both groups were 100%, and the early complication rates were not significantly different (P = 0.43). The median stent patency in the BDC group was significantly longer than that in the CDC group (7.8 ± 1.5 vs. 5.7 ± 0.7 months, P = 0.001), and the median overall survival period in the BDC group was prone to significant difference than that in the CDC group (9.4 ± 4.0 vs. 8.2 ± 0.3 months, P = 0.089). Conclusion: The findings of this study show that BDC with chemotherapy was associated with better stent patency and survival. However, since the sample size was very small, large randomized controlled multicenter studies are needed to further evaluate the long-term survival effects of BDC in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma combined with obstructive jaundice.

Interventional Treatment Strategy for Primary Budd-Chiari Syndrome with Both Inferior Vena Cava and Hepatic Vein Involvement: Patients from Two Centers in China.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study evaluated interventional treatments (recanalization, balloon dilation, and/or stent placement) for Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS), caused by combined obstruction of the inferior vena cava (IVC) and hepatic veins (HVs). METHODS: Before and after interventional therapy, patients with BCS (n = 162; asymptomatic 105.2 ± 103.3 mo; follow-up 15 [6-24] mo) underwent imaging studies (color Doppler ultrasound, CT, or MRI), and inferior vena cavography and manometry. Venous lesions were characterized by occlusion features, and presence of thrombosis and peripheral collateral vessels. RESULTS: One, 2, and 3 main HV occlusions were observed, respectively, in 25 (15.4%), 61 (37.7%), and 76 (46.9%) patients. Eighty-three (51.2%), 98 (60.5%), and 104 (64.2%) patients had, respectively, large accessory HVs, venous collaterals formed between the HVs, or venous communicating branches between the HV and the peritoneal veins. The middle, left, and right HV was patent in 32 (19.8%), 35 (21.6%), and 44 (27.2%) patients. Recanalization of both hepatic and caval occlusions was successful in 96% (51/53) of those attempted; recanalization of IVC occlusion was successful in 97% (106/109). Among 157 patients successfully treated, 146 were cured and 11 showed clinical improvement. Clinical symptoms were relieved in 82.4% after the initial intervention, and 94.2% after the second intervention. CONCLUSION: Recanalization and balloon angioplasty was effective for the management of BCS with concurrent HV and IVC occlusions. The majority of patients required only IVC recanalization. The outcome of patients treated only by IVC intervention was similar to that of patients given combined HV and IVC intervention.

The side effects and complications of percutaneous iodine-125 seeds implantation under CT-guide for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

PURPOSE: The present study investigates the side effects and complications of computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous iodine-125 (I-125) seeds implantation for advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The clinical data were retrospectively analyzed for patients treated with implantation of I-125 seeds under CT-guide in our hospital from May 2010 to April 2015. The side effects and complications were collected and their possible reasons were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 78 patients were enrolled. The side effects were categorized as fever in 29 cases (37.18%), abdominal pain in 26 cases (33.33%), nausea and vomiting in 9 cases (11.54%), diarrhea in 5 cases (6.41%), and constipation in 4 cases (5.13%). Complications were composed of pancreatitis in 9 cases (11.54%), infection in 5 cases (6.41%), seed migration in 2 cases (2.56%), intestinal perforation in 1 case (1.28%), and intestinal obstruction in 1 case. The incidence of complication was 23.08% (18/78). The difference in incidence of complication was statistically significant between patients implanted with ≤27 seeds and those with >27 seeds (P = .032). CONCLUSION: The side effects and complications frequently occur in implantation of I-125 seeds for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. More concern should be given to the patients treated by this technique.