Suppr超能文献

经颈静脉肝内门体分流术治疗肝硬化合并复发性食管静脉曲张出血患者的临床结局

Clinical Outcomes of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Among Cirrhosis Patients With Recurrent Esophageal Variceal Bleeding.

作者信息

Shafiq Muhammad, Khan Mehran A, Khan Shahryar

机构信息

Internal Medicine, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, USA.

Medicine, Nowshera Medical College, Nowshera, PAK.

出版信息

Cureus. 2024 Nov 5;16(11):e73101. doi: 10.7759/cureus.73101. eCollection 2024 Nov.

Abstract

Background Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been shown to reduce the risk of rebleeding among patients with recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding. However, the impact of TIPS on survival remains uncertain. This study took on this challenge to determine if TIPS has any impact on all-cause inpatient mortality during the hospitalization in which it is performed and if it impacts all-cause 30-day readmission rates when compared to patients who only undergo esophageal variceal banding (EVB) for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study using the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project - National Readmission Database 2019. All adult patients who had a diagnosis of cirrhosis, were hospitalized once for esophageal variceal bleeding requiring EVB in 2019, and then were hospitalized again later in the year for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding requiring either TIPS or EVB were included. This second hospitalization in which patients either received TIPS or EVB only was considered as the index hospitalization. Patients with missing data and patients who were discharged in December were excluded. The primary outcome was all-cause 30-day readmission rates among patients who either received TIPS or EVB only. The secondary outcomes included: (i) incidence of all-cause inpatient mortality; and (ii) length of hospital stay during index hospitalization. Patients who underwent TIPS were matched with patients who underwent EVB only on age, sex, and baseline comorbidities. After propensity score matching, survival analysis was performed to compare the all-cause 30-day readmission rates after the index hospitalization, between patients who either received TIPS or EVB only during the index hospitalization. χ2 test was used to compare the inpatient mortality. As the data did not have a normal distribution, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the length of index hospitalization between patients who either received TIPS or EVB only. The alpha criterion was set at 0.05 for all statistical tests. Results This study found no difference in all-cause 30-day readmission rates between patients who underwent either TIPS or EVB only for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding (hazard ratio: 1.24, 95%CI: 0.73-2.12, P = 0.4). In the exploratory analysis, it was noted that the rate of recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding, among patients who were readmitted within 30 days was lower in the TIPS group (13.3%) when compared to the EVB group (50%) with a risk ratio of 0.27 (95%CI: 0.10-0.72, P = 0.003). Although it was not statistically significant, the inpatient mortality rate during the index hospitalization appeared to be lower in the TIPS group when compared to the EVB group (4.2% 10.08%, respectively). Patients who underwent TIPS were hospitalized three days longer than patients who underwent EVB only. Conclusion TIPS does not reduce all-cause 30-day readmission rates but is associated with reduced 30-day readmission rates secondary to recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding. TIPS shows a modest survival advantage during index hospitalization when compared to EVB only.

摘要

背景 经颈静脉肝内门体分流术(TIPS)已被证明可降低复发性食管静脉曲张出血患者再次出血的风险。然而,TIPS对生存率的影响仍不确定。本研究应对这一挑战,以确定TIPS在其实施的住院期间对全因住院死亡率是否有任何影响,以及与仅接受食管静脉曲张套扎术(EVB)治疗复发性食管静脉曲张出血的患者相比,TIPS是否会影响全因30天再入院率。方法 这是一项回顾性队列研究,使用2019年医疗成本和利用项目-国家再入院数据库。纳入所有诊断为肝硬化、2019年因食管静脉曲张出血需要进行EVB而住院一次、随后在当年晚些时候因复发性食管静脉曲张出血需要进行TIPS或EVB而再次住院的成年患者。患者仅接受TIPS或EVB的第二次住院被视为索引住院。排除数据缺失的患者和12月出院的患者。主要结局是仅接受TIPS或EVB的患者的全因30天再入院率。次要结局包括:(i)全因住院死亡率;(ii)索引住院期间的住院时间。接受TIPS的患者与仅接受EVB的患者在年龄、性别和基线合并症方面进行匹配。在倾向评分匹配后,进行生存分析以比较索引住院后仅在索引住院期间接受TIPS或EVB的患者的全因30天再入院率。采用χ2检验比较住院死亡率。由于数据不呈正态分布,采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较仅接受TIPS或EVB的患者的索引住院时间。所有统计检验的α标准设定为0.05。结果 本研究发现,仅接受TIPS或EVB治疗复发性食管静脉曲张出血的患者的全因30天再入院率没有差异(风险比:1.24,95%CI:0.73-2.12,P = 0.4)。在探索性分析中,注意到在30天内再次入院的患者中,TIPS组复发性食管静脉曲张出血的发生率(13.3%)低于EVB组(50%),风险比为0.27(95%CI:0.10-0.72,P = 0.003)。尽管无统计学意义,但与EVB组相比,TIPS组在索引住院期间的住院死亡率似乎较低(分别为4.2%和10.08%)。接受TIPS的患者比仅接受EVB的患者住院时间长3天。结论 TIPS不会降低全因30天再入院率,但与复发性食管静脉曲张出血导致的30天再入院率降低有关。与仅接受EVB相比,TIPS在索引住院期间显示出适度的生存优势。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验