Qian Yu, MD (he/him/his)
University of Chicago
Disclosure(s): No financial relationships to disclose
Waseem Wahood, MS
Dr. Kiran C. Patel College of Allopathic Medicine, Nova Southeastern University
: MEDLINE and Embase databases were queried until July 2022 for comparative studies reporting procedure metrics for TIPS creation with or without IVUS guidance. Meta-analysis was performed with random-effects modeling for total procedural time, time to portal venous access, fluoroscopy time, iodinated contrast volume use, air kerma, dose area product, and number of needle passes. Intraoperative procedure-related complications were also reviewed.
Of 95 unique records initially identified, 6 were eligible for inclusion. A total of 194 and 240 patients underwent TIPS with and without IVUS guidance. Pooled analyses indicated that IVUS guidance was associated with reduced total procedure time (SMD -0.76 [95% CI -1.02, -0.50] P < 0.001), time to portal venous access (SMD -0.41 [95% CI -0.67, -0.15] P = 0.002), fluoroscopy time (SMD, -0.54 [95% CI -1.02, -0.07]; P = 0.002), contrast volume use (SMD, -0.89 [95% CI -1.16, -0.63]; P < 0.001), air kerma (SMD, -0.75 [95% CI -1.11, -0.38]; P < 0.001) and dose area product (SMD, -0.98 [95% CI -1.77, -0.20]; P = 0.013). 4.2 and 7.8 needle passes were required in the IVUS and non-IVUS group, respectively (SMD, -0.60 [95% CI -1.42, 0.21]; P = 0.134), whereas pooled complication rates were 15.2% (12/79), and 21.4 % (28/131), respectively.
IVUS guidance during TIPS creation improves procedural metrics including procedural time, contrast usage, and radiation exposure.