Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Outcomes in the Elderly Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a procedure typically utilized to treat refractory ascites and variceal bleeding. However, TIPS can lead to significant complications, most commonly hepatic encephalopathy (HE). Advanced age has been described as a risk factor for HE, as the elderly population tends to have decreased cognitive reserve and increased sarcopenia. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available literature to summarize the association between advanced age and risk of adverse events after undergoing TIPS. Methods: A comprehensive search strategy to identify reports of specific outcomes (HE, 30-day and 90-day mortality, and 30-day readmission due to HE) in elderly patients after undergoing TIPS was developed in Embase (Embase.com, Elsevier). We compared outcomes and performed separate data analyses for patients aged < 70 vs. > 70 years and patients aged < 65 vs. > 65 years. Results: Six studies with a total of 1,591 patients met our inclusion criteria and were included in the final meta-analysis. Three studies divided patients by age < 65 vs. > 65 years, with a total of 816 patients who were 54% male. The remaining three studies divided patients by age < 70 vs. > 70 years, with a total of 775 patients who were 63% male. Results demonstrated a significantly lower risk of post-TIPS HE (risk ratio (RR): 0.42, confidence interval (CI): 0.185 - 0.953, P = 0.03, I 2 = 49%), 30-day mortality (RR: 0.37, CI: 0.188 - 0.74, P = 0.005, I 2 = 0%), and 90-day mortality (RR: 0.35, CI: 0.24 - 0.49, P = 0.001, I 2 = 0%) in patients aged > 70 vs. < 70 years, as well as a trend towards lower risk of 30-day readmission due to HE. There was no significant difference in post-TIPS HE, 30-day or 90-day mortality, or 30-day readmission due to HE between patients aged < 65 vs. > 65 years. Conclusion: Age > 70 years is associated with significantly higher rates of HE and 30-day and 90-day mortality rates in patients after undergoing TIPS, as well as a trend towards higher 30-day readmission due to HE. Gastroenterol Res. 2022;15(6):325-333 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/gr1571
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.025 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".