Embolization of portosystemic shunts for treatment of medically refractory hepatic encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment options for refractory hepatic encephalopathy (HE) are limited. Patients who fail medical management may harbor large portosystemic shunts (PSSs) which are possible therapeutic targets. This study aims to describe patient selection, effectiveness, and safety of percutaneous PSS embolization in those with medically refractory HE. A retrospective evaluation of consecutive adult patients with medically refractory HE referred for PSS embolization at a tertiary center was performed (2003-2015). Patient data collected included the type of HE, medications, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, shunt type, embolization approach, and materials used. Outcomes of interest were immediate (7 days), intermediate (1-4 months), and longer-term (6-12 months) effectiveness and periprocedural safety. Effectiveness was determined based on changes in hospitalization frequency, HE medications, and symptoms. Twenty-five patients with large PSS were evaluated for shunt embolization. Five were excluded due to high MELD scores (n = 1), comorbid conditions (n = 1), or technical considerations (n = 3). Of 20 patients who underwent embolization, 13 had persistent and 7 had recurrent HE; 100% (20/20) achieved immediate improvement. Durable benefit was achieved in 100% (18/18) and 92% (11/12) at 1-4 and 6-12 months, respectively. The majority (67%; 8/12) were free from HE-related hospitalizations over 1 year; 10% developed procedural complications, and all resolved. Six developed new or worsening ascites. In conclusion, PSS embolization is a safe and effective treatment strategy that should be considered for select patients with medically refractory HE. Liver Transplantation 22 723-731 2016 AASLD.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".