MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416809671 · doi:10.1111/apt.70453

Diabetes Mellitus is a Risk Factor for Hepatic Encephalopathy Following Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt

2025· article· en· W4416809671 on OpenAlexaff
Michelle Spaan, Ellen Werner, Willemijn Dijkstra, Diederik C. Bijdevaate, Sarwa Darwish Murad, Milan J. Sonneveld, Caroline M. den Hoed, Anne Van Eldere, Dave Sprengers, Willem Pieter Brouwer, Robert J. de Knegt, Harry L.A. Janssen, Kay Pieterman, Sandra Coenen, Raoel Maan

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shuntRisk factorHepatic encephalopathyCirrhosisDiabetes mellitusIncidence (geometry)Portal hypertension

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement effectively decreases portal pressure in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. However, many patients develop hepatic encephalopathy (HE) post-TIPS. We investigated the relation between the presence of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and the occurrence of HE following TIPS placement in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study all patients with cirrhosis who received a TIPS from 2007 through 2021 were included. Baseline characteristics and decompensating events including hospital admission for HE were recorded. In cases where hospital admission was required, HE was considered severe. RESULTS: In total, 325 patients were included and 113 (34.8%) had DM at the time of TIPS placement. One hundred and fifty-one patients developed HE of whom 86 (57.0%) were hospitalised. The cumulative 6-month incidences of HE and severe HE were 45.2% (95% CI 39.5-51.8) and 25.1% (95% CI 20.2-31.3), respectively. Multivariable Cox regression with competing risk analyses demonstrated that DM was independently associated with the risk of both HE (aHR 1.56, 95% CI 1.08-2.26, p = 0.018) and severe HE (aHR 1.76, 95% CI 1.07-2.90, p = 0.026). These associations were independent of the relation between HE and age (aHR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.05, p < 0.001) or MELD-Na score (aHR 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.10, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the high incidence of HE following TIPS and shows that DM is a significant and independent risk factor for the development of HE. Given the increase in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated liver cirrhosis and DM, this study offers additional insights into the balance of risks and benefits associated with TIPS placement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207