Lower 90-day Hospital Readmission Rates for Esophageal Variceal Bleeding After TIPS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hospital readmission rates following a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) insertion after an episode of esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) has not been well studied. We aimed to address this gap in knowledge on a population level. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD) was used to study the readmission rates for patients with decompensated cirrhosis who had a TIPS insertion performed for EVB. The NRD is a national database that tracks patients longitudinally for hospital readmissions. A propensity score matching model was created to match patients who received TIPS with those who did not. RESULTS: A total of 42,679,001 hospital admissions from the 2012 to 2014 NRD sample were analyzed. There were 33,934 patients with EVB who met inclusion criteria for the study, of whom, 1527 (4.5%) received TIPS after EVB and were matched with 1527 patients with EVB who did not undergo TIPS. With a uniform follow-up of 3 months, patients with TIPS were less likely to be readmitted to hospital with a recurrent EVB [odds ratio (OR): 0.33, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.24-0.47, P<0.01], although were more likely to be readmitted with hepatic encephalopathy (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.31-2.11, P<0.01). At 3 months, there was no difference in all cause hospital readmission rate between the 2 groups (OR: 38.8%; 95% CI: 38.1-44.9 TIPS vs. OR: 41.5%; 95% CI: 34.1-43.3 non-TIPS: P=0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In this large nationally representative study, TIPS insertion after an episode of EVB was associated with a significantly lower risk of 3-month readmission for recurrent EVB compared with patients who did not receive TIPS. Although those receiving TIPS had a higher rate of hepatic encephalopathy the overall readmission remained unchanged.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".