Cargando…

Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a standard treatment option for the management of portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis. Since the introduction of covered stents, shunt patency has been greatly improved. However, it remains uncertain about whether covered stents...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Qi, Xingshun, Tian, Yulong, Zhang, Wei, Yang, Zhiping, Guo, Xiaozhong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5330607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28286557
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756283X16671286
_version_ 1782511258781614080
author Qi, Xingshun
Tian, Yulong
Zhang, Wei
Yang, Zhiping
Guo, Xiaozhong
author_facet Qi, Xingshun
Tian, Yulong
Zhang, Wei
Yang, Zhiping
Guo, Xiaozhong
author_sort Qi, Xingshun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a standard treatment option for the management of portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis. Since the introduction of covered stents, shunt patency has been greatly improved. However, it remains uncertain about whether covered stents could improve survival. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has been performed to compare the outcomes of covered versus bare stents for TIPS. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify the relevant randomized controlled trials. Overall survival, shunt patency, and hepatic encephalopathy were the major endpoints. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity was calculated. Cochrane risk of bias tool was employed. RESULTS: Overall, 119 papers were identified. Among them, four randomized controlled trials were eligible. Viatorr covered stents alone, Fluency covered stents alone, and Viatorr plus Fluency covered stents were employed in one, two, and one randomized controlled trials, respectively. Risk of bias was relatively low. Meta-analyses demonstrated that the covered-stents group had significantly higher probabilities of overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.50–0.90, p = 0.008) and shunt patency (HR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.29–0.62, p < 0.0001) than the bare-stents group. Additionally, the covered-stents group might have a lower risk of hepatic encephalopathy than the bare-stents group (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49–1.00, p = 0.05). The heterogeneity among studies was not statistically significant in the meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with bare stents, covered stents for TIPS may improve the overall survival. In the era of covered stents, the indications for TIPS may be further expanded.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5330607
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53306072017-03-10 Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials Qi, Xingshun Tian, Yulong Zhang, Wei Yang, Zhiping Guo, Xiaozhong Therap Adv Gastroenterol Original Research BACKGROUND: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a standard treatment option for the management of portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis. Since the introduction of covered stents, shunt patency has been greatly improved. However, it remains uncertain about whether covered stents could improve survival. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials has been performed to compare the outcomes of covered versus bare stents for TIPS. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify the relevant randomized controlled trials. Overall survival, shunt patency, and hepatic encephalopathy were the major endpoints. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity was calculated. Cochrane risk of bias tool was employed. RESULTS: Overall, 119 papers were identified. Among them, four randomized controlled trials were eligible. Viatorr covered stents alone, Fluency covered stents alone, and Viatorr plus Fluency covered stents were employed in one, two, and one randomized controlled trials, respectively. Risk of bias was relatively low. Meta-analyses demonstrated that the covered-stents group had significantly higher probabilities of overall survival (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.50–0.90, p = 0.008) and shunt patency (HR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.29–0.62, p < 0.0001) than the bare-stents group. Additionally, the covered-stents group might have a lower risk of hepatic encephalopathy than the bare-stents group (HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.49–1.00, p = 0.05). The heterogeneity among studies was not statistically significant in the meta-analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with bare stents, covered stents for TIPS may improve the overall survival. In the era of covered stents, the indications for TIPS may be further expanded. SAGE Publications 2016-10-20 2017-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5330607/ /pubmed/28286557 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756283X16671286 Text en © The Author(s), 2016 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page(https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Research
Qi, Xingshun
Tian, Yulong
Zhang, Wei
Yang, Zhiping
Guo, Xiaozhong
Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_fullStr Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_short Covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
title_sort covered versus bare stents for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5330607/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28286557
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1756283X16671286
work_keys_str_mv AT qixingshun coveredversusbarestentsfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicshuntanupdatedmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT tianyulong coveredversusbarestentsfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicshuntanupdatedmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT zhangwei coveredversusbarestentsfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicshuntanupdatedmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yangzhiping coveredversusbarestentsfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicshuntanupdatedmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT guoxiaozhong coveredversusbarestentsfortransjugularintrahepaticportosystemicshuntanupdatedmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials