MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323350963 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac036.245

A245 A TERTIARY CENTRE REVIEW OF PORTO-SYSTEMIC SHUNTS: AN INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT TOOL IN LIVER DISEASE MANAGEMENT

2023· article· en· W4323350963 on OpenAlexaff
Shamir Malik, Gideon M. Hirschfield, Arash Jaberi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAscitesPortal hypertensionShunt (medical)Liver diseasePortosystemic shuntSurgeryCirrhosisRetrospective cohort studyChronic liver diseaseInternal medicineGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Portal hypertensive complications arising from chronic liver disease are increasingly prevalent. Radiologically placed porto-systemic shunts are used successfully to address complications such as ascites and recurrent variceal bleeding. Purpose We sought, with approval from ethics to electronically chart review the UHN experience for TIPSS (transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt) and DIPS (direct intrahepatic porto-caval shunt) over time. Method We employed a search strategy focused on radiologic databases, to identify UHN patients who had received a porto-systemic shunt insertion over three decades between January 1, 1990, to September 14, 2021. A total of 238 UHN patients that had a shunt imaged, re-assessed, or inserted were included in this retrospective electronic chart review. Demographic information was recorded at baseline. Data pertaining to clinical outcomes of portal hypertension such as refractory ascites, recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding and ESLD progression was recorded at baseline, 1 month, 3 months and 6 months post-shunt insertion. HVPG was recorded pre-shunt and post-shunt insertion. Transplant-free survival and post-operative complications was also assessed. Patients were followed until death or liver transplant. Result(s) Out of 238 patients confirmed, 219 had a TIPSS insertion and 19 a DIPS insertion. The average age at time of shunt was 55.1 ± 8.4 years. 53.7% (n=128) of patients were male. Indications for portosystemic shunt placement included refractory ascites (n=141), recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding (n=73), hydrothorax (n=10), hepatorenal syndrome (n=8), and portal vein thrombosis (n=4). Etiology of disease was categorized as alcohol-associated liver disease (n=107), non-alcohol associated fatty liver disease (n=36), viral hepatitis (n=27), autoimmune hepatitis (n=38) and vascular liver disease (n=20). Relevant events noted post procedure included hepatic encephalopathy (n=34), hydrothorax (n=17), vascular (including stent) thrombosis (n=17) and renal failure (n=4). 12 months post-shunt insertion 2.5% (n=6) of patients had died or received liver transplant; of these 1.7% (n=4) were transplanted. HPVG fell consistently post-procedure: 15.6 ± 1.5mmHg pre-shunt to 5.9 ± 1.2mmHg post-shunt. There was no observable increase in MELD-Na score in the first month post-shunt. Temporal trends showed that more patients aged 50 to 69, and more female patients, are now receiving shunt insertion than at the initiation of the chart review. Image Conclusion(s) Portosystemic shunt placement in the form of TIPSS or DIPS insertion is an increasingly common and effective treatment for portal hypertension in patents with advanced liver disease at UHN. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicLiver Disease and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→