MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Early Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation Compared to Endoscopy With Pharmacotherapy in the Management of Variceal Rebleeding in Cirrhotic Patients: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Presidential Poster Award

2018· article· en· W2921718600 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yousef Nassar, Seth Richter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTransjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shuntInternal medicinePortal hypertensionOdds ratioGastroenterologyPharmacotherapyHepatic encephalopathyTherapeutic endoscopyCirrhosisEndoscopyConfidence intervalMeta-analysisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The use of early or rescue transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been evaluated in cirrhotic patients with a history of variceal bleeding. In this study, we aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies investigating the efficacy and safety of early TIPS in the management of variceal bleeding as well as comparing the use of early compared to rescue TIPS. Methods: Medical electronic databases were queried for clinical studies in which TIPS creation was compared with endoscopy and pharmacotherapy treatment in cirrhotic patients with a history of variceal bleeding. Search results were screened against predefined eligibility criteria and data were extracted to a standard data extraction form. Meta-analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software and the risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane tool and modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale Results: Thirty-four studies that enrolled 2876 cirrhotic patients (n=1453 in the TIPS group and n=1423 in the endoscopy with pharmacotherapy group) were included. Overall analysis displayed significantly reduced re-bleeding, odds ratio (OR) = 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.22-0.38], p< 0.0001) and bleeding-related death (OR= 0.28, 95% CI [0.18-0.44], p< 0.0001) in the TIPS group. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between all TIPS and endoscopy with pharmacotherapy (OR= 0.93, 95% CI [0.74-1.16], p= 0.52) and there was an increased incidence of hepatic encephalopathy (OR= 1.80, 95% CI [1.41-2.28], p< 0.0001) in the TIPS group (pooled analysis of both early and rescue TIPS). Early use of TIPS did not reveal any differences in hepatic encephalopathy (OR= 1.27, 95% CI [0.9-1.7], p= 0.13) and showed a decreased mortality in high risk patients (Child-Pugh class C, Child-Pugh class B with active bleeding at endoscopy, and hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] ≥20 mm Hg) when compared to rescue TIPS. Conclusion: TIPS creation decreases rebleeding at the cost of increased hepatic encephalopathy with no survival benefit. Early TIPS creation may confer better clinical outcomes in terms of comparable hepatic encephalopathy and improved survival in high-risk patients when compared to rescue TIPS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.028
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology→Same topicLiver Disease and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→