Effects of ascites resolution after successful TIPS on nutrition in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Malnutrition is common in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and refractory ascites. The use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPS) is effective in eliminating ascites. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of TIPS and resolution of refractory ascites on the nutritional status of patients with decompensated cirrhosis. METHODS: Fourteen consecutive patients with refractory ascites and a Pugh score of 9.0+/-0.5 had a TIPS insertion. Biochemical data, resting energy expenditure (REE), total body nitrogen (TBN), body potassium (TBK), body fat (TBF), muscle force (MF), and food intake were recorded before TIPS, and at 3 and 12 months after the procedure. RESULTS: Ten patients completed the study. Baseline values for REE, TBN, TBF, MF, and energy intake were below normal at baseline. There was a significant increase in dry weight, TBN, and REE at 3 and 12 months compared with baseline. TBF improved significantly at 12 months. There was a trend toward an increase in energy intake (p = 0.072). There was no change in protein intake, TBK, MF, and Pugh score. CONCLUSION: In cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites, resolution of the ascites after TIPS placement resulted in improvement of several nutritional parameters, especially for body composition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".