Comparison Study Of Doppler Ultrasound Surveillance Of Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene-Covered Stent Versus Bare Stent In Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt

Qian Huang,Xingjiang Wu,Xinxin Fan,Jianmin Cao,Jianming Han,Lin Xu,Ning Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.20709

2010-01-01

Abstract:Objective. This prospectively randomized controlled study aimed to assess with Doppler ultrasound (US) the shunt function of expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) stent versus bare stent and to evaluate the usefulness of routine TIPS follow-up of ePTFE-covered stents.Methods. Sixty consecutive patients were randomized for bare or covered transjugular TIPS stenting in our institution between April 2007 and April 2009. Data of follow-up Doppler US, angiography, and portosystemic pressure gradient measurements were collected and analyzed.Results. The follow-up period was 8.34 +/- 4.42 months in the bare-stent group and 6.16 +/- 3.89 months in the covered-stent group. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. Two hundred three US studies were performed in 60 patients, with a mean of 3.4 per patient, and demonstrated abnormalities in 28 patients (21 bare stents, 7 ePTFE-covered stents), 19 of them (13 in bare-stent group, 6 in covered-stent group) showing no clinical evidence of recurrence. Ten of 13 patients in the bare-stent group underwent balloon angioplasty or additional stent placement, whereas only one of six patients in the covered-stent group needed reintervention for intimal hyperplasia. The average peak velocity in the midshunt of ePTFE-covered stent was 139 +/- 26 cm/s after TIPS creation and 125 +/- 20 cm/s during follow-up, which was significantly higher than the bare-stent group (p < 0.05). The main portal vein and hepatic artery showed higher flow velocities in the ePTFE-covered stent group than in the bare-stent group. ePTFE-covered stents maintained lower portosystemic pressure gradient than bare stents (9.5 +/- 2.9 versus 13.2 +/- 1.5 mmHg, p < 0.05).Conclusions. ePTFE-covered stents resulted in higher patency rates and better hemodynamics than bare stents. Routine US surveillance may not be necessary in patients with ePTFE-covered TIPS stent. (C) 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Ultrasound 38:353-360, 2010; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www. interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/jcu.20709