Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_616_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана

.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
66 Мб
Скачать
PORTAL HYPERTENSION 429
CD
E
https://t.me/medicina_free
A B
FIG. 4 (A and B) Endoscopic appearances of esophageal varices. (A) EGD demonstrating dilated and straight veins (small esophageal varices) in the
distal esophagus (arrow). (B) EGD demonstrating large esophageal varices, greater than 5 mm in diameter, with a fibrin plug (arrow) indicating the site of a recent bleed. (C–E) Large esophageal varices. Endoscopic view of the lower third of the esophagus demonstrating varices greater than 5 mm in diameter.
(C)Large varix (arrow) with a red wale sign. (D) Red wale sign—longitudinal whip mark on varix (arrow). (E) Large varix with hematocystic spot (arrow). (A and B from Friedman LS, Brandt LJ, Feldman M. Sleisenger and Fordtran’s Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Management. 11th ed.
Elsevier; 2021; C–E from Sanyal AJ, etal: Zakim and Boyer’s Hepatology: A Textbook of Liver Disease. 6th ed. Elsevier; 2012.)
the varix as the band sloughs, leaving the posterior vessel wall still intact. Also, because bleeding is a potential complication of EVL, this procedure may better serve patients if performed in a high-resource environment. An EVL session every 1 to 8 weeks until eradication is
effective. Proton pump inhibitors are used as adjunctive treatment for the 0.3% to 3% of ligation-related esophageal ulcers. Surveillance EGD should be performed in 1 to 3 months after eradication, then every 6 to 12 months to assess for recurrence.
430 ENDOSCOPIC THERAPY FOR ESOPHAGEAL VARICEAL HEMORRHAGE
https://t.me/medicina_free
TABLE 2 Primary Prevention of Variceal Hemorrhage in Patients With Small Varices With Red Spots
or Varices >5 mm
Therapy Therapy Dose Therapy Goals Maintenance
Propranolol 20–40 mg BID HR 55–60 per minute Check HR
Max: 320 mg/day SBP >90 mm Hg Indefinitely 160 mg/day with ascites No F/U EGD
Nadolol 20–40 mg daily HR 55–60 per minute Check HR
Max: 160 mg/day SBP >90 mm Hg Indefinitely 80 mg/day with ascites No F/U EGD
Carvedilol 6.25 mg daily SBP >90 mm Hg Indefinitely
After 3 days 6.25 mg BID No F/U EGD Max: 12.5 mg/day
EVL Every 2–8 weeks until eradication Variceal eradication EGD 3–6 months after eradication
then every 3–6 months
BID, Twice a day; EGD, esophagogastroduodenoscopy; EVL, endoscopic variceal ligation; FU, follow-up; HR, heart rate; S BP, systolic blood pressure.
MANAGEMENT OF ACUTE GASTROESOPHAGEAL VARICEAL HEMORRHAGE
Resuscitation
Patients who present with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) (hematemesis, melena, currant jelly stools) with findings suggestive of portal hypertension or cirrhosis (ascites, thrombocytopenia, ele­vated prothrombin time, history of cirrhosis) should be suspected of gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage. Patients often present in hemorrhagic shock with altered mental status. Initial resuscitation should focus on the orderly evaluation of airway, breathing, and cir­culation. Hematemesis can result in aspiration, especially in patients with developing encephalopathy caused by hyperammonemia, so one should consider early intubation. Intravenous access with at least two large-bore IVs is essential. Restrictive balanced blood volume resuscitation should be initiated based on the physiologic response rather than hemoglobin levels while avoiding fluid overload from crystalloid, which may increase portal pressures. Quantification of blood loss is more challenging in gastrointestinal bleeds, but ini­tiation of a massive transfusion protocol may help facilitate blood products and resources in patients at risk of exsanguination. Many cirrhotic patients have an existing coagulopathy that may require earlier initiation of platelet and fresh-frozen plasma transfusions.
Resuscitation of a hemodynamically unstable patient precludes waiting for laboratory values. However, restrictive resuscitation studies are mostly based on laboratory values and may be consid­ered in hemodynamically stable patients. Restrictive resuscitation in previous prospective studies, defined by a hemoglobin transfusion threshold of <7 g/dL, was associated with higher survival, decreased rebleeding, and no significant increases in HVPG or portal pres­sures compared with a liberal hemoglobin transfusion threshold of <9 g/dL. Interestingly, in one prospective study, patients received significant volumes of crystalloid recorded averaging 5.5 L within the first 72 hours in both restrictive and liberal arms. More studies may be indicated to determine whether survival is influenced by also practicing restrictive crystalloid resuscitation in the setting of gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage. A recent randomized clinical trial (HALT-IT) of over 12,000 patients with gastrointestinal bleeding demonstrated no benefit of tranexamic acid.
Intravenous Antibiotics
The risk of infection is about 60% in cirrhotic patients with gastroin­testinal hemorrhage, with the exception of patients with Child-Pugh grade A cirrhosis, whose infection risk is only 5%. Antibiotics will significantly reduce the rate of infections, mortality, rebleeding, and transfusion requirements as demonstrated in clinical trials. Ceftriax­one 1 g/day for 7 days seems to be favored in patients with encepha­lopathy, ascites, malnutrition, and known quinolone resistance.
Vasoactive Agents
Vasoactive agents, such as octreotide, somatostatin, terlipressin, and vasopressin, have been shown to reduce all-cause mortality and decrease transfusion requirements. Octreotide and vasopressin are available in the United States. An octreotide IV bolus of 50 µg fol­lowed by an infusion of 50 µg/hour should be given over 2 to 5 days and should be initiated before endoscopy.
Prokinetics
The use of metoclopramide or erythromycin may help with visual­ization at endoscopy and is associated with a lower incidence of need for repeat EGD in UGIBs, but it has not affected survival. NGTs and lavage are not effective in evacuating clotted blood from the stomach or diagnosing UGIBs.
Balloon Tamponade
In patients for whom definitive treatment is not available, balloon tamponade with an esophagogastric tube is very effective until the patient can reach definitive treatment. Figure 5 illustrates three different variations of balloon tamponade tubes. Patients should be intubated before placing these tubes because of the risk of aspiration and poor tolerance. The Minnesota tube has four separate ports including a suction port and a balloon port for the esophagus. The tube must be placed well into the stomach (at least 50 cm) before inflating the gastric balloon to avoid esophageal perforation. Trac­tion is placed on the tube until mild resistance is met. The placement must be verified by x-ray demonstrating the air-filled balloon in the
PORTAL HYPERTENSION 431
https://t.me/medicina_free
FIG. 5 Esophageal tamponade tubes. (A) Sengstaken-Blakemore tube. (B) Linton-Nachlas tube. (C) Minnesota tube.
(From Urden LD, etal. Priorities in Critical Care Nursing. 5th ed. Mosby, 2008.)
stomach. Because most gastroesophageal varices are at the gastro­esophageal junction, tamponade can usually be accomplished by only filling the gastric balloon. Mild traction is placed on the balloon of 0.5 kg to 1.0 kg using saline IV bags. If bleeding is seen from the esophageal suction port, the esophageal balloon can be carefully inflated. For clinicians practicing in low-resource areas, familiarity with the operation and location of a balloon tamponade tube can be life saving. The tube should not remain for more than 24 hours. Although these tubes can control bleeding in 80% of patients, they are associated with complications secondary to aspiration, migration, esophageal perforation, or esophageal necrosis.
Endoscopic Variceal Ligation
Once the patient is hemodynamically stable, an urgent EGD should be performed within 12 hours of admission with the patient intubated to avoid the risk of aspiration. EVL is the favored treatment over endoscopic sclerotherapy (EST) for controlling esophageal variceal hemorrhage as well as for secondary prevention. Several prospective, randomized trials comparing EVL to EST demonstrated that EVL was superior to EST for rapidly eradicating varices, less recurrent bleeding, increased survival, and fewer complications. These find­ings were validated in a meta-analysis. One study demonstrated
432 ENDOSCOPIC THERAPY FOR ESOPHAGEAL VARICEAL HEMORRHAGE
https://t.me/medicina_free
decreased rebleeding with EVL combined with a β-blocker. Several commercial multiband preloaded devices are available with trans­parent caps. Once the varix is identified, the cap or tip is placed up to the varix with application of continuous suction to bring the varix within the cap for deployment of the band. Visualization of the bleeding varix may be a challenge in a bloody field requiring active flushing and suction. Consensus guidelines recommend EVL every 1 to 2 weeks until eradication to avoid rebleeding in the absence of prospective trials typically requiring 2 to 4 sessions. During second­ary prophylaxis sessions, bands are placed at the gastroesophageal junction working proximally in a helical fashion within the palisade and perforating zones (Fig. 6). Because esophageal varices can recur, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3 to 6 months after EVL. The presentation of EVL band-induced bleeding ulcer may occur in up to 14% of patients. PPIs may provide adjunctive therapy in preventing bleeding after EVL, but prospective trials are lacking.
Endoscopic Sclerotherapy
EST has been used to treat variceal hemorrhage for over 50 years and was adopted more widely in the 1970s. The advent of flexible endos­copy in the 1980s resulted in rapid progress of endoscopic treatment of variceal hemorrhage. Commonly used agents include ethanol­amine oleate, polidocanol, sodium morrhuate, sodium tetradecyl sulfate, and ethanol at varying concentrations, volumes, and inter­vals. Trials have not defined a single most effective agent. EST is 90% effective in controlling esophageal variceal bleeding and may be per­formed in patients in whom EVL may be technically difficult. EST is also a less expensive option in lower-resource locations. Techniques include paravariceal injection adjacent to the varix or direct intra­variceal injection of the sclerosant. Gastric varices in continuity with esophageal varices (GOV1) below the gastroesophageal junction may
be treated with EST. Reported local and systemic complications of EST vary greatly in trials and may be related to operator experience and follow-up of patients. Complications may include retrosternal chest pain, dysphagia, esophageal ulcers with subsequent bleeding, esophageal strictures, esophageal perforation secondary to extensive necrosis, mediastinitis, bronchoesophageal fistula, bacteremia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and death in 2%.
Other Endoscopic Techniques
Argon plasma coagulation has been combined with EVL to eradicate esophageal varices with a low recurrence rate and no recorded com­plications. However, this technique is expensive, and this equipment is not available in many endoscopic centers.
The technique of endoscopic clipping has also been described in treating acute variceal bleeding and for prevention, with favorable outcomes in small controlled trials, but it is not widely implemented or studied.
The use of detachable nylon mini-loops with similar efficacy as EVL has been largely abandoned after the development of preloaded multiband devices for EVL.
Injection of adhesives (e.g., cyanoacrylate-based tissue adhesives) compared with EVL for the treatment of esophageal varices demon­strated more minor complications and higher variceal recurrence rates. Complications include embolic events and equipment damage.
MANAGEMENT OF ENDOSCOPIC
TREATMENT FAILURES
Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement
Placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) by interventional radiology in the setting of acute variceal hemor­rhage may be a salvage procedure for refractory or recurrent bleed­ing. This shunt is created by placing a covered metal stent between the hepatic vein and portal vein with the goal of decreasing portal pressure and decompressing esophageal varices as well as GOV1 and GOV2 gastric varices.
FIG. 6 Schema of the lower esophagus anatomy drawn by deCarvalho in
1966. Zone 3 is the junction of the area drained by the portal vein system and the systemic circulation. This segment begins caudally from the transi-
level of diaphragmatic penetration, spanning the entire abdominal portion of the esophagus. These longitudinal vessels, called palisade vessels, present in the mucosal layer of the lower esophagus, are detected by endos­copy. EGJ, Esophagogastric junction. (From Ishimura N, Amano Y, Kinoshita
Y. Endoscopic definition of esophagogastric junction for diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus: importance of systematic education and training. Dig Endosc. 2009;21:213–218; adapted from De Carvalho C. Sur I’angio-architecture veineu­se de la zone de transition oesophagogastrique et son interpretation fonctionelle. Cells Tissues Organs. 1966;64:125–162.)
Esophageal Stent for Refractory Bleeding
In small studies, the use of self-expandable esophageal covered metal stents as a bridge therapy for refractory bleeding shows promise. These stents can stay in for days, allowing for optimization of the patients. One small randomized controlled study comparing esopha­geal stenting versus balloon tamponade in 28 patients demonstrated better control of bleeding, decreased transfusion requirements, and lower serious adverse events in the stenting group. Figure 7 shows an example of a self-expandable covered metal stent.
Gastric Varices
Gastric varices bleed less frequently than esophageal varices and account for 10% to 30% of all variceal hemorrhages; however, gastric variceal hemorrhages tend to be more severe, with higher mortality and rebleeding rates. The endoscopic and interventional radiology procedures are often predicated on the classification and pathophys­iology of the gastric varices. As with esophageal varices, the risk of rupture increases with the size of the varix. If possible, patients with gastric varices may be better served at experienced, high-resource multidisciplinary centers because of their complexity and acuity.
Classification
Sarin’s classification of gastric varices is the most commonly used, and gastric varices are classified into four types based on location (Fig. 8). Sarin’s classification of gastric varices, prevalence, and inci- dence of bleeding are listed in Table 3.
PORTAL HYPERTENSION 433
https://t.me/medicina_free
Endoscopic Treatment of Gastric Varices
Endoscopic treatment of bleeding gastric varices includes the following:
Band ligation with or without detachable snares
Sclerotherapy
Obturation with tissue adhesives or glue
Thrombin injection
Combined therapy
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided therapy
Only limited data are available regarding the treatment of bleed­ing gastric varices. Results from limited prospective studies are often variable and uncontrolled; therefore, it is difficult to draw conclu­sions about the efficacy of one treatment over another.
In contrast with esophageal varices, band ligation does not appear to be the preferred treatment of gastric varices because of
FIG. 7 Self-expandable covered metal stent.
FIG. 8 Sarin’s classification is the most commonly used for risk stratifica-
tion and management of gastric varices. GOV type 1 (GOV1): EV extend below the cardia into the lesser curvature. GOV2: EV extend into the fundus. Isolated GV1 (IGV1) are located in the fundus. IGV2 are locat­ed elsewhere in the stomach. EV, Esophageal varices; GV, gastric varices;
GO V, gastroesophageal varices; IGV, isolated gastric varice. (From Elmunzer BJ, Chandrasekhara V, Khashab MA, Muthsamy VR. Clinical Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 3rd ed. Elsevier; 2019.)
TABLE 3 Sarin’s Classification of Gastric Varices,
Prevalence, and Bleeding Risk
Bleeding
Classification Location Prevalence
Gastroesophageal
Lesser curvature 70%–74% 25% varix type 1 (GOV1)
Gastroesophageal
varix type 2
Greater
curvature
21%–24% 60%
(GOV2)
Isolated gastric varix
type 1 (IGV1)
Isolated gastric varix
type 2 (IGV2)
Greater
curvature
Stomach/
duodenum
2%–7% 90%
1%–2% 15%
Risk
high rebleeding rates likely resulting from the failure to obliterate the entire feeding vessel. Also, sclerotherapy has been less effective in gastric varices as opposed to esophageal varices. Gastric varices often require larger volumes of sclerosant, especially with GOV2 and IGV1, resulting in more complications including large ulcerations, perforations, and mediastinitis. In acute gastric variceal bleeding, sclerotherapy may control bleeding in 60% to 100% of cases, with unacceptable rebleeding rates up to 90%. Sclerotherapy may be effective in treating GOV1 hemorrhage, but it should be avoided in GOV2 and IGV1 bleeding varices because of low success of primary hemostasis and the high rate of rebleeding.
Gastric variceal obturation (GVO) with tissue adhesives (e.g., N-butyl-2-cyanoacralate or fibrin glue) when compared with ligation or sclerotherapy appears to be the most effective endoscopic inter­vention for the treatment of acute gastric variceal hemorrhage. The endoscopic technique consists of injecting small aliquots (1–1.5 mL) of cyanoacrylate into the varix followed by a normal saline flush of volume equal to the needle catheter dead space as the needle is with­drawn from the varix. The tissue adhesives with fast polymerization using small aliquots appear to be associated with lower incidents of embolic complications that occur in 1% to 5%. Bacteremia is another complication of GVO, so antibiotics should be administered. Equip­ment damage from tissue adhesives is another complication. Several studies have reported initial hemostasis in 90%, with recurrent rebleeding rates of 15% to 30%. One to three sessions may be required for eradication, with success in GOV1, GOV2, and IGV1. Injection therapy of cyanoacrylate-based compounds for the treatment of gas­tric varices is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.
Direct injection of thrombin into a bleeding gastric varix pub­lished in several small series appears to show promise with high efficacy and low complications and may have a treatment role. Com­bination endoscopic therapy using ligation and sclerotherapy, GVO and ligation, and GVO with sclerotherapy have been described in small series with mixed results. EUS-guided injection of tissue adhe­sives and/or EUS-guided coil embolization into perforating veins has recently emerged as a possible tool for treatment of gastric varices in several small series.
Radiologic Intervention for Gastric Varices
When endoscopic treatment fails, TIPS may provide salvage therapy with initial hemostasis of 87% to 100% and a rebleeding rate of 10% to 30%. Frequent complications of TIPS include encephalopathy and shunt stenosis or occlusion.
Of note, gastric varices classified as IGV1 can be seen in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension and in patients with splenic vein or portal vein thrombosis. These patients may present with massive hemorrhage. Because 80% to 85% of IGV1 drain via a gast­rorenal shunt into the left renal vein, this provides a pathway to varix outflow for interventional radiologists to perform balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO). During this procedure, the varix is occluded with a balloon followed by the delivery of coils
434 TRANSJUGULAR INTRAHEPATIC PORTOSYSTEMIC SHUNT
https://t.me/medicina_free
and sclerosants with the goal to obliterate the varix. Although BRTO has been shown to be as effective as TIPS in the treatment of gastric variceal bleeding, it does not produce encephalopathy, but BRTO does increase portal pressure, which may worsen esophageal varices. Major complications include shock and atrial fibrillation.
SUMMARY
Although mortality from gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage has decreased over the decades with the advent of advanced endoscopic and image-guided treatments, variceal bleeds still result in signifi­cant morbidity and mortality. Hence, primary prevention of gastro­esophageal bleeding plays an essential role in reducing morbidity and mortality. The optimal management of acute gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage with early intubation, balanced, restrictive resuscitation of blood products, IV antibiotics, vasoactive agents, and endoscopic intervention remain the cornerstone of manag­ing these patients. For bleeding esophageal varices, band ligation remains the gold standard treatment. Tamponade by gastroesopha­geal balloon tubes or self-expandable fully covered esophageal stents provide bridging treatments. Gastric variceal hemorrhage treatment is often based on the classification, location, and drainage pattern of the varix with gastric variceal obturation by tissue adhesives as the most effective therapy. Image-guided interventions include TIPS, EUS-guided embolization, and BRTO. High-resource centers are able to provide these patients with the multidisciplinary treatment options.
S U G G E S T E D R E A D I N G S
Avgerinos A, Armonis A, Stefanidis G, etal. Sustained rise of portal pressure
after sclerotherapy, but not band ligation, in acute variceal bleeding in cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2004;39(6):1623–1630.
Bazarbashi AN, Ryou M. Portal pressure measurement: Have we come full
circle? Gastrointest Endosc. 2021;93(3):573–576.
Chavez-Tapia NC, Barrientos-Gutierrez T, Tellez-Avila FI, etal. Antibiotic
prophylaxis for cirrhotic patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;2010(9):CD002907.
Committee, ASGE Practice Standards. The role of endoscopy in the man-
agement of variceal hemorrhage. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 2014:1132–
1138 The role of endoscopy in the management of variceal hemorrhage (asge.org).
Escorsell À, Pavel O, Cárdenas A, etal. Esophageal balloon tamponade versus
esophageal stent in controlling acute refractory variceal bleeding: A mul­ticenter randomized, controlled trial. Hepatology. 2016;63(6):1957–1967.
Harras F, Sheta el S, Shehata M, etal. Endoscopic band ligation plus argon
plasma coagulation versus scleroligation for eradication of esophageal varices. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;25(6):1058–1065.
Ishimura N, Amano Y, Kinoshita Y. Endoscopic definition of esophagogastric
junction for diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus: importance of systematic education and training. Dig Endosc. 2009;21(4):213–218.
Jhajharia A, Wanjari SJ, Ashdhir P, et al. Role and safety of human throm-
bin injection for the treatment of bleeding gastric varices. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2018;37(4):321–325.
LaBrecque D, Khan AG, etal. Esophageal varices. World Gastroenterology
Organisation Global Guidelines. 2014; Available at: https://www.spg.pt/
wp-content/uploads/Guidelines/WGO/2014_FINAL_ESOPHAGEAL­VARICES.pdf.
Nave R. Department of Physics and Astronomy, Georgia State University.
Retrieved on 02/14/2022 from: Pressure (gsu.edu), 2022.
Odutayo A, Desborough MJ, Trivella M, etal. Restrictive versus liberal blood
transfusion for gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta­analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;2(5):354–360.
Philips CA, Ahamed R, Rajesh S, etal. Beyond the scope and the glue: update
on evaluation and management of gastric varices. BMC Gastroenterol. 2020;20(1):361.
Poza Cordon J, Froilan Torres C, etal. Endoscopic management of esophageal
varices. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;4(7):312–322.
Roberts I, Shakur-Still H, Afolabi A, etal. A high-dose 24-hour tranexamic
acid infusion for the treatment of significant gastrointestinal bleeding: HALT-IT RCT. Health Technol Assess. 2021;25(58):1–86.
Tamarozzi F, Fittipaldo VA, Orth HM, etal. Diagnosis and clinical manage-
ment of hepatosplenic schistosomiasis: A scoping review of the literature. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15(3):e0009191.
Villanueva C, Colomo A, Bosch A, et al. Transfusion strategies for acute
upper gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(1):11–21.
Wani ZA, Bhat RA, Bhadoria AS, et al. Gastric varices: Classification,
endoscopic and ultrasonographic management. J Res Med Sci. 2015;20(12):1200–1207.
Yol S, Belviranli M, Toprak S, Kartal A. Endoscopic clipping versus band
ligation in the management of bleeding esophageal varices. Surg Endosc. 2003;17(1):38–42.
Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt
Andrew R. Kolarich, MD, Yvonne Tsitsiou, MBBS, and Christos Georgiades, MD, PhD
INTRODUCTION
(TIPS) was put forth as a possible treatment for the symptoms of portal hypertension in the early 1970s, with the first TIPS placement performed in 1989. TIPS is an artificial connection between the portal and hepatic vein, bypassing the liver, and a durable solution for portal hypertension with a long-term efficacy of 90%. Meticulous technique and stringent patient selection are critical to keep the morbidity and mortality in patients with portal hypertension at a minimum. Refinement of the technique and additional techniques deployed by interventional radiologists, including direct intrahepatic
portosystemic shunt (DIPS) and adjunct techniques for treatment of variceal bleeding (such as balloon- or plug-assisted transvenous obliteration), have expanded treatment options for patients with complications of portal hypertension.
INDICATIONS
Causes of portal hypertension are summarized in Table 1. Whatever the causative pathophysiology, TIPS can directly reduce or normalize the elevated portal pressure and reduce or ameliorate symptoms. Current indications for TIPS, which are expanding, along with con­traindications are summarized in Table 2. TIPS can be performed on an emergent basis or as an elective procedure. Multidisciplinary communication between hepatologists, interventional radiologists, and transplant surgeons is necessary to identify and select appropri­ate patients for TIPS.
Acute Variceal Bleeding and Secondary Prophylaxis
Portal hypertension can cause varices along the entire gastrointestinal tract from the esophagus to the rectum to divert the elevated portal flow to the heart. Gastroesophageal varices, formed between the
PORTAL HYPERTENSION 435
https://t.me/medicina_free
TABLE 1 Causes of Portal Hypertension
Presinusoidal Perisinusoidal Postsinusoidal
Portal, splenic, or superior mesenteric vein
thrombosis
Idiopathic portal hypertension Congenital hepatic fibrosis Veno-occlusive disease (Sinusoidal obstruction
Mass effect (i.e., tumor) Sarcoidosis Chronic passive congestion (Nutmeg liver) Schistosomiasis Mass effect (i.e., tumor) Primary biliary cirrhosis Alcoholic central sclerosis Endothelitis (liver rejection, radiation injury) Arterio-portovenous fistula (traumatic or
Osler-Weber-Rendu)
Hyperdynamic splenomegaly (infectious or
myelodysplastic)
Nodular regenerative hyperplasia
Cirrhosis Budd-Chiari syndrome
syndrome)
TABLE 2 Indications and Contraindications for TIPS
Indications Contraindications
Indication Condition Absolute Relative
Portal variceal hemorrhage Refractory to medical/
endoscopic management
Recurrent ascites Refractory to medical
management
Recurrent, hepatic hydrothorax Refractory to medical
management
Hepatorenal syndrome May help in Type 2 Severely elevated right heart
Hepatopulmonary syndrome Scant evidence Severe encephalopathy Budd-Chiari syndrome Bridge to transplant Active infection Portal gastropathy Refractory to β-blockers
coronary vein (also known as the left gastric vein) and the lower esoph­ageal veins, are the most likely to rupture and bleed because of the high transluminal pressure gradient caused by the negative esophageal luminal pressure during inspiration. Primary treatment of bleeding gastroesophageal varices is medical management (i.e., somatostatin or octreotide) followed by endoscopic management (i.e., sclerotherapy/ epinephrine injection, band ligation, clip placement). Even though endoscopic management is often temporarily successful, recurrent bleeding is expected in more than half of the patients. Unlike medical or endoscopic management, TIPS addresses the underlying portal hypertension and, outside of liver transplant, is the only definitive treatment. In patients at high risk of treatment failure (i.e., Child-Pugh class B with active bleeding at index endoscopy or Child-Pugh class C score lower than 14 points), TIPS placement is indicated at an early time point, which is within 72 hours (ideally <24 hours).
Ascites
Ascites is the most common complication of cirrhosis. In addition to severe limitations in lifestyle, ascites poses risks for bacterial
Uncorrectable bleeding diathesis Hepatic vein thrombosis
Portal vein thrombosis
Poor liver function reserve
pressure
peritonitis, renal failure, and increased mortality. Initial management of ascites is medical and includes diuretics, aldosterone antagonists, and sodium restriction. Intermittent paracentesis generally follows, which is often done on an outpatient basis. In advanced stages, ascites becomes refractory to medical management and repeat para­centesis becomes burdensome. TIPS is very effective in eliminating ascites, but as the root causes of ascites are hemodynamic/hormone related, the response is not immediate. It may take 2 to 4 weeks after TIPS for ascites to resolve, during which time paracentesis may be necessary. Often, drainage of ascites before TIPS placement is per­formed to decrease movement of the liver.
Hepatic Hydrothorax
Hepatic hydrothorax is defined as the accumulation of at least 500 mL of pleural fluid in a patient with cirrhosis, without cardiopul­monary disease. Even though this definition is not highly specific to hepatic hydrothorax, additional signs such as isolated right-sided hydrothorax and concurrent ascites help confirm the diagnosis. It occurs in less than 10% of patients with cirrhosis as peritoneal fluid
436 TRANSJUGULAR INTRAHEPATIC PORTOSYSTEMIC SHUNT
https://t.me/medicina_free
permeates via diaphragmatic communications. Initial management is sodium restriction and diuretics; in nonresponsive patients, TIPS will eliminate hydrothorax in most and decrease the frequency of thoracentesis in the rest.
Hepatorenal Syndrome
Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) portends a poor prognosis for the cir­rhotic patient, as it occurs during the late stages of the hemodynamic changes related to cirrhosis. Alterations in vasoactive hormones responding to these hemodynamic changes result in splanchnic vasodilation, renal artery vasoconstriction, and the opening of small intrarenal arteriovenous communications. The result is renal hypoperfusion and ensuing renal failure.
Two distinct forms of HRS have been identified: type 1 HRS, which progresses rapidly, and type 2 HRS, which evolves slowly. Type 1 HRS is precipitated by either an event that incites acute-on-chronic liver failure, an exaggerated systemic inflammatory response, or kid­ney dysfunction as part of a broader multiorgan failure. Targeting the precipitating event is the hallmark of treatment for type 1 HRS. Type 2 HRS results from the reduction of effective arterial blood volume created by a shift of fluid from the intravascular compartment to the extravascular compartment (i.e., ascites). Noncontrolled studies suggest using TIPS to reduce the production of ascites in type 2 HRS.
Hepatopulmonary Syndrome
Hepatopulmonary syndrome is the presence of intrapulmonary vasodilation and multiple small right-to-left shunts that result in impaired gas exchange. Because of the lack of data, TIPS can­not be recommended as standard treatment for hepatopulmonary syndrome. However, in selected cases, especially in severely com­promised patients on the liver transplant list, TIPS may prove a lifesaving bridge to transplant.
Budd-Chiari Syndrome
Budd-Chiari syndrome is an uncommon condition caused by obstruction of the hepatic venous outflow tract, resulting in cirrhosis and portal hypertension. The etiology of Budd-Chiari syndrome encompasses several conditions; it is deemed primary when the hepatic venous outflow obstruction is primarily a venous problem (patients with hypercoagulable states resulting in thrombus, venous webs) and secondary when it relates to extrinsic compression (com­pression from tumors, cysts, or abscesses). Clinical presentation may be asymptomatic, fulminant, acute, subacute, or chronic.
The treatment for patients presenting with fulminant Budd­Chiari syndrome, which develops within a few days with severe liver failure, abrupt onset of ascites, and hepatomegaly, is liver transplan­tation. If caused by a hepatic venous web, angioplasty and placement of a TIPS or DIPS has proven to be a valuable tool in bridging these patients with fulminant Budd-Chiari syndrome to transplant.
In the nonfulminant forms of Budd-Chiari syndrome, anticoag­ulation is the first-line therapy. When anticoagulation fails, TIPS is a reasonable and accepted next step, as is DIPS if the hepatic veins are occluded. The use of TIPS in this patient population was examined in a large retrospective study that showed 1-year and 10-year trans­plant-free survival were much greater than expected. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) now recom­mends creation of a TIPS in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome who fail to improve with anticoagulation.
Portal Hypertensive Gastropathy
Portal hypertensive gastropathy (which is distinguished from vascu­lar ectasia) is the diffuse dilation of gastric veins that, along with the inflamed and fragile mucosa of the stomach, predispose the patient to bleeding. Gastric varices occur less frequently than esophageal
varices but are associated with massive bleeding events and higher mortality rates. Various treatment modalities, including pharma­cotherapy and endoscopic treatment, can be used as prophylactic agents and acute treatment of bleeding portal gastropathy. However, without portal decompression, rebleeding is imminent. TIPS can help decrease portal pressures, which can help decompress and control variceal bleeding, and is indicated in portal hypertensive gastropathy. However, patients with poor hepatic reserve, as defined by the Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score >17–19, are shown to have a significantly higher 3-month mortality rate than those with lower MELD scores. In patients with isolated portal hypertensive gastropathy, balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) and TIPS have been well described in the lit­erature as effective procedures in managing gastric varices with low rebleeding rates.
TECHNIQUE
Patient Preparation
Many complications of TIPS can be avoided or reduced by proper patient workup. Review of pertinent cross-sectional imaging con­firms a patent (nonthrombosed) portal vein. This minimizes the number of attempts to engage the portal vein and minimizes associ­ated risk for bleeding. Good hydration minimizes risk of acute renal failure. Initiation of metronidazole or lactulose mitigates the risk of encephalopathy. Patients should be blood-typed and cross-matched in the event of a bleeding complication. Finally, relevant risks, espe­cially the 30-day mortality, which ranges from 1% to 3% for elective procedures in well-compensated patients to 30% for emergent TIPS in patients with advanced liver disease, should be understood by the treating physicians, the patient, and their family. Detailed steps with rationale for the TIPS placement procedure are shown in Figure 1.
Diagnostic Assessment
Optimizing the TIPS outcomes requires not only anatomic assess­ment, but also functional assessment of the patient’s hemodynamic status. One strong contraindication to TIPS is elevated right heart pressure; ensuring that the right atrial pressure is not severely ele­vated is mandatory. If this is not done, shunting of portal venous blood to an overburdened right heart can result in pulmonary con­gestion, frequently necessitating intubation. Right atrial pressures below 15 mm Hg are generally safe, whereas pressures above 20 mm Hg predispose patients to acute right heart failure. There are no specific guidelines; thus, sound clinical judgment is important; for example, an unstable patient with ongoing variceal bleeding and a right atrial pressure of 16 mm Hg should not be automatically pre­cluded from a potentially lifesaving TIPS.
After selecting the right hepatic vein, free and wedged hepatic venous pressures are measured and usually confirm portal hyper­tension. Normal corrected pressures are not accurate in general and should not necessarily terminate the procedure. In fact, they are wholly inaccurate in cases of presinusoidal (e.g., Budd-Chiari syn­drome) portal hypertension.
If the direct portal pressure is within normal limits, TIPS cre­ation is abandoned irrespective of the clinical picture. If a TIPS is not possible or contraindicated, the gastroesophageal varices can be embolized via a catheter to stop the hemorrhage without placing a TIPS. Balloon-assisted transvenous obliteration (BRTO) and its derivative procedures are very effective but temporary; the ongoing portal hypertension will likely cause new varices to form (Fig. 2).
If the direct portal pressure is elevated, the stent is advanced through the larger sheath, keeping it constrained and in position. The sheath is pulled back into the right atrium, uncovering the stent. The distal 2 cm of the stent are uncovered and flare out on withdrawal of the sheath. The rest of the stent is then fully expanded under fluoroscopy.
PORTAL HYPERTENSION 437
AB
CD
EF
GH
https://t.me/medicina_free
FIG. 1 Steps of performing a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement. (A) Access into the right hepatic vein (black arrowhead) is achieved
through the right internal jugular vein (black arrow) to the inferior vena cava (IVC). Once the right hepatic vein is selected (B), a balloon catheter (black arrow) may be used to measure indirect portal pressures. Right portal vein is accessed through the liver parenchyma (C) from the right hepatic vein with a long needle (black arrow). Confirmation of proper portal vein access is obtained with contrast injection (D) via a catheter (black arrow). A wire (arrows) is then advanced deep with its tip (arrowhead) into the portal vein (E). At this point direct portal pressures are obtained. If no portal hypertension is found, the operator must exclude presinusoidal causes (i.e., splenic vein thrombosis, narrowing). If no presinusoidal cause is found, TIPS is aborted. Balloon dilation of the liver tract is performed (F). The traversed liver parenchyma is fibrotic and difficult to cross unless predilated. A small caliber (4- to 6-mm diameter) balloon (white arrow) is used to pre- dilate the liver parenchyma between the right portal and hepatic veins. The TIPS stent (arrow) is partially deployed in the portal vein (G). Its distal 2 cm (black arrowheads) are self-expandable and used to anchor the stent while the operator pulls the stent back for positioning. Once position is satisfactory (H), the rest of the stent is fully extended (arrow). Final pressures are measured and a portal venogram is performed via a catheter (arrowhead) to confirm proper positioning and function. (Color images courtesy Jeni Fairman and Dr. Cory Sandone, Department of Art as Applied to Medicine, Johns Hopkins University.)
438 TRANSJUGULAR INTRAHEPATIC PORTOSYSTEMIC SHUNT
AB
CD
https://t.me/medicina_free
FIG. 2 Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) with partially occlusive portal vein thrombus and balloon retrograde transvenous obliteration
(BRTO). (A) Portal venogram obtained through tract from the inferior vena cava (IVC), through the right hepatic vein and into the portal vein demon­strates a filling defect in the portal vein (black arrowhead) consistent with thrombus. Large varices visualized in the left upper quadrant of the abdomen (black arrows). Selective catheterization of large varix (B) with para-esophageal varix (black arrow). A large draining vessel is visualized (black arrowhead). Deployment of embolization coils (C) in the previously visualized varix (black arrow). TIPS shunt (D) subsequently deployed into the portal vein. Coils from embolized varix visualized (black arrow). Portal venogram demonstrates a patent proximal portal vein (white arrow).
Shunt Evaluation
Usually a 10-mm diameter stent is used, and initially it is dilated up to 8 mm in diameter. The direct portal pressure is measured again; if it is not satisfactory, a 10-mm balloon is used to open the stent to capacity. The smaller the stent diameter, the lower risk of enceph­alopathy postprocedure. A final portal venogram is performed to document flow and lack of variceal filling.
SPECIAL CASES
Direct Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt
DIPS is a recently developed modification to the TIPS procedure. Using intravascular ultrasound guidance, DIPS has been shown to decrease radiation dose and procedural time compared with
TIPS. DIPS uses the caudate lobe as a parenchymal tract to create a side-to-side portocaval shunt, which removes the possibility of hepatic vein stenosis. Portal venous access is then accomplished, and a shunt can be created using a polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stent graft. Creation of specific stent-graft devices have improved patency rates.
In patients with an occluded TIPS, challenging anatomy, calcifica­tion of the portal vein, or portal vein thrombosis due to hepatocellu­lar carcinoma, DIPS is of value. Additionally, the creation of a TIPS in a patient with Budd-Chiari syndrome is especially challenging because the hepatic veins are thrombosed (Fig. 3). This appears as the classic spider vein appearance on a hepatic venogram. Although portal decompression is best accomplished by placing the TIPS from the hepatic to the portal vein, DIPS is often the best option when the hepatic veins are occluded.