Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunts With Covered Stents Increase Transplant-Free Survival of Patients With Cirrhosis and Recurrent Ascites

BACKGROUND & AIMS: There is controversy over the ability of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) to increase survival times of patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites. The high rate of shunt dysfunction with the use of uncovered stents counteracts the benefits of TIPS. We performed a randomized controlled trial to determine the effects of TIPS with stents covered with polytetrafluoroethylene in these patients. METHODS: We performed a prospective study of 62 patients with cirrhosis and at least 2 large-volume paracenteses within a period of at least 3 weeks; the study was performed at 4 tertiary care centers in France from August 2005 through December 2012. Patients were randomly assigned to groups that received covered TIPS (n = 29) or large-volume paracenteses and albumin as necessary (LVP+A, n = 33). All patients maintained a low-salt diet and were examined at 1 month after the procedure then every 3 months until 1 year. At each visit, liver disease-related complications, treatment modifications, and clinical and biochemical variables needed to calculate Child-Pugh and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores were recorded. Doppler ultrasonography was performed at the start of the study and then at 6 and 12 months after the procedure. The primary study end point was survival without a liver transplant for 1 year after the procedure. RESULTS: A higher proportion of patients in the TIPS group (93%) met the primary end point than in the LVP+A group (52%) (P = .003). The total number of paracenteses was 32 in the TIPS group vs 320 in the LVP+A group. Higher proportions of patients in the LVP+A group had portal hypertension-related bleeding (18% vs 0%; P = .01) or hernia-related complications (18% vs 0%; P = .01) than in the TIPS group. Patients in LVP+A group had twice as many days of hospitalization (35 days) as the TIPS group (17 days) (P = .04). The 1-year probability of remaining free of encephalopathy was 65% for each group. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized trial, we found covered stents for TIPS to increase the proportion of patients with cirrhosis and recurrent ascites who survive transplantation-free for 1 year, compared with patients given repeated LVP+A. These findings support TIPS as the first-line intervention in such patients. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT00222014

Screening of esophageal varices by esophageal capsule endoscopy: results of a French multicenter prospective study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Esophageal video capsule endoscopy (ECE) is a new technique that allows examination of the esophagus using a noninvasive approach. The aim of this study was to compare ECE with esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for the diagnosis of esophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 330 patients with cirrhosis and with no known esophageal varices were prospectively enrolled. Patients underwent ECE first, followed by EGD (gold standard). The endoscopists who performed EGD were blind to the ECE result. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a visual analog scale (maximum score 100). RESULTS: A total of 30 patients were excluded from the analysis because they did not undergo any endoscopic examinations. Patients (mean age 56 years; 216 male) had mainly alcoholic (45 %) or viral (27 %) cirrhosis. The diagnostic indices of ECE to diagnose and correctly stage esophageal varices were: sensitivity 76 % and 64 %, specificity 91 % and 93 %, positive predictive value 88 % and 88 %, and negative predictive value 81 % and 78 %, respectively. ECE patient satisfaction scored significantly higher than EGD (87 ± 22 vs. 58 ± 35; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: ECE was well tolerated and safe in patients with liver cirrhosis and suspicion of portal hypertension. The sensitivity of ECE is not currently sufficient to replace EGD as a first exploration in these patients. However, due to its excellent specificity and positive predictive value, ECE may have a role in cases of refusal or contraindication to EGD. ECE might also improve compliance to endoscopic follow-up and aid important therapeutic decision making in the prophylaxis of bleeding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT (ID RCB 2009-A00532-55) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00941421)