The surgical treatment for portal hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ISRN gastroenterology Pub Date : 2013-01-01 Epub Date: 2013-01-27 DOI:10.1155/2013/464053
Lanning Yin, Haipeng Liu, Youcheng Zhang, Wen Rong
{"title":"The surgical treatment for portal hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Lanning Yin,&nbsp;Haipeng Liu,&nbsp;Youcheng Zhang,&nbsp;Wen Rong","doi":"10.1155/2013/464053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Aim. To compare the effectiveness of surgical procedures (selective or nonselective shunt, devascularization, and combined shunt and devascularization) in preventing recurrent variceal bleeding and other complications in patients with portal hypertension. Methods. A systematic literature search of the Medline and Cochrane Library databases was carried out, and a meta-analysis was conducted according to the guidelines of the Quality of Reporting Meta-Analyses (QUOROM) statement. Results. There were a significantly higher reduction in rebleeding, yet a significantly more common encephalopathy (P = 0.05) in patients who underwent the shunt procedure compared with patients who had only a devascularization procedure. Further, there were no significant differences in rebleeding, late mortality, and encephalopathy between selective versus non-selective shunt. Next, the decrease of portal vein pressure, portal vein diameter, and free portal pressure in patients who underwent combined treatment with shunt and devascularization was more pronounced compared with patients who were treated with devascularization alone (P < 0.05). Conclusions. This meta-analysis shows clinical advantages of combined shunt and devascularization over devascularization in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding and other complications in patients with portal hypertension.</p>","PeriodicalId":89397,"journal":{"name":"ISRN gastroenterology","volume":"2013 ","pages":"464053"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/464053","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ISRN gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/464053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/1/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Aim. To compare the effectiveness of surgical procedures (selective or nonselective shunt, devascularization, and combined shunt and devascularization) in preventing recurrent variceal bleeding and other complications in patients with portal hypertension. Methods. A systematic literature search of the Medline and Cochrane Library databases was carried out, and a meta-analysis was conducted according to the guidelines of the Quality of Reporting Meta-Analyses (QUOROM) statement. Results. There were a significantly higher reduction in rebleeding, yet a significantly more common encephalopathy (P = 0.05) in patients who underwent the shunt procedure compared with patients who had only a devascularization procedure. Further, there were no significant differences in rebleeding, late mortality, and encephalopathy between selective versus non-selective shunt. Next, the decrease of portal vein pressure, portal vein diameter, and free portal pressure in patients who underwent combined treatment with shunt and devascularization was more pronounced compared with patients who were treated with devascularization alone (P < 0.05). Conclusions. This meta-analysis shows clinical advantages of combined shunt and devascularization over devascularization in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding and other complications in patients with portal hypertension.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

门静脉高压症的手术治疗:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
的目标。比较外科手术(选择性或非选择性分流术、断流术和联合分流断流术)在预防门脉高压患者复发性静脉曲张出血和其他并发症方面的有效性。方法。对Medline和Cochrane图书馆数据库进行系统文献检索,并按照报告质量meta分析(QUOROM)声明的指导方针进行meta分析。结果。与仅行断流术的患者相比,行分流术的患者再出血发生率明显更高,但脑病发生率明显更高(P = 0.05)。此外,选择性分流术与非选择性分流术在再出血、晚期死亡率和脑病方面没有显著差异。其次,分流和断流联合治疗的门静脉压力、门静脉直径和自由门静脉压力的下降比单独断流治疗的门静脉压力下降更明显(P < 0.05)。结论。这项荟萃分析显示,在预防门脉高压患者静脉曲张出血复发和其他并发症方面,联合分流和断流术比断流术具有临床优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信