BACKGROUND The use of intravascular ultrasound(iUS)has been shown in multiple singlecenter retrospective studies to decrease procedure time,radiation exposure,and needle passes compared to conventional fluoroscopic gu...BACKGROUND The use of intravascular ultrasound(iUS)has been shown in multiple singlecenter retrospective studies to decrease procedure time,radiation exposure,and needle passes compared to conventional fluoroscopic guidance in the creation of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt(TIPS).However,there are few data regarding the impact of imaging guidance modality choice on clinical outcomes.AIM To determine the impact of iUS vs fluoroscopic guidance during creation of a TIPS on procedural metrics,liver injury,shunt patency and mortality.METHODS The retrospective study cohort consisted of 66 patients who underwent TIPS creation using iUS[“iUS-guided TIPS(iTIPS)group”]and 135 patients who underwent TIPS creation using fluoroscopic guidance[“conventional fluoroscopic-guided TIPS(cTIPS)group”]at 2 tertiary academic medical centers from 2015-2019.TIPS that required variceal embolization or portal vein recanalization were excluded.RESULTS The technical success rate was 100%in the iTIPS group and 96%in the cTIPS group(P=0.17).The iTIPS group had an air kerma(266±254 mGy vs 1235±1049 mGy,P<0.00001),dose area product(5728±6518 uGy×m^(2) vs 28969±19067 uGy×m^(2),P<0.00001),fluoroscopy time(18.7±9.6 minutes vs 32.3±19.0 minutes,P<0.00001),and total procedure time(93±40 minutes vs 110±51 minutes,P=0.01)which were significantly lower than the cTIPS group.There was no significant difference in liver function test adverse event grade at 1 month.With a median follow-up of 26 months(inter quartile range:6-61 months),there was no difference between the two groups in terms of thrombosis-free survival(P=0.23),intervention-free survival(P=0.29),or patient mortality(P=0.61).CONCLUSION The use of iUS in the creation of TIPS reduces radiation exposure and procedure time compared with fluoroscopic guidance.At midterm follow-up,the imaging guidance modality did not affect shunt patency or mortality.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND The use of intravascular ultrasound(iUS)has been shown in multiple singlecenter retrospective studies to decrease procedure time,radiation exposure,and needle passes compared to conventional fluoroscopic guidance in the creation of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt(TIPS).However,there are few data regarding the impact of imaging guidance modality choice on clinical outcomes.AIM To determine the impact of iUS vs fluoroscopic guidance during creation of a TIPS on procedural metrics,liver injury,shunt patency and mortality.METHODS The retrospective study cohort consisted of 66 patients who underwent TIPS creation using iUS[“iUS-guided TIPS(iTIPS)group”]and 135 patients who underwent TIPS creation using fluoroscopic guidance[“conventional fluoroscopic-guided TIPS(cTIPS)group”]at 2 tertiary academic medical centers from 2015-2019.TIPS that required variceal embolization or portal vein recanalization were excluded.RESULTS The technical success rate was 100%in the iTIPS group and 96%in the cTIPS group(P=0.17).The iTIPS group had an air kerma(266±254 mGy vs 1235±1049 mGy,P<0.00001),dose area product(5728±6518 uGy×m^(2) vs 28969±19067 uGy×m^(2),P<0.00001),fluoroscopy time(18.7±9.6 minutes vs 32.3±19.0 minutes,P<0.00001),and total procedure time(93±40 minutes vs 110±51 minutes,P=0.01)which were significantly lower than the cTIPS group.There was no significant difference in liver function test adverse event grade at 1 month.With a median follow-up of 26 months(inter quartile range:6-61 months),there was no difference between the two groups in terms of thrombosis-free survival(P=0.23),intervention-free survival(P=0.29),or patient mortality(P=0.61).CONCLUSION The use of iUS in the creation of TIPS reduces radiation exposure and procedure time compared with fluoroscopic guidance.At midterm follow-up,the imaging guidance modality did not affect shunt patency or mortality.
