Clinical effect of Viatorr stent versus double-stent technique in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt

Objective To investigate the clinical effect of Viatorr stent versus double-stent technique in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt ( TIPS) . Methods A total of 62 patients with portal hypertension who underwent TIPS in Department of Interventional Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, from May 2015 to December 2016 were enrolled, among whom 55 had a major symptom of upper gastrointestinal bleeding and 7 had intractable ascites. According to the type of covered stent used in the surgery, the patients were divided into Viatorr stent group with 22 patients and double-stent group with 40 patients ( bare stent + Fluency covered stent) .The patients were followed for 6-17 months after surgery, and the shunt patency rate, incidence rate of hepatic encephalopathy, and mortality rate were determined. The independent samples t-test or the paired samples t-test was used for comparison of continuous data between groups, and the chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups. Results All patients underwent TIPS successfully, and a total of 22 Viatorr stents, 40 bare stents, and 40 Fluency covered stents, with a diameter of 8 mm, were implanted. Portal venous pressure was significantly reduced from 28. 7 ± 4. 9 mm Hg before surgery to 18. 7 ± 4. 7 mm Hg after surgery in the Viatorr stent group ( t = 9. 9, P < 0. 01) and from 27. 2 ± 4. 3 mm Hg before surgery to 18. 8 ± 3. 9 mm Hg after surgery in the double-stent group ( t = 13. 5, P < 0. 01) . Gastrointestinal bleeding was stopped for all 55 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and 7 patients with intractable ascites achieved ascites regression. The patency rate was 95. 5% in the Viatorr stent group and 90. 0% in the double-stent group, the incidence rate of hepatic encephalopathy was 9% in the Viatorr stent group and 15% in the double-stent group, and the mortality rate was 4. 5% in the Viatorr stent group and 12. 5% in the double-stent group; there were no significant differences between the two groups ( all P> 0. 05) . Conclusion Both Viatorr stent and double-stent technique have a good clinical effect in TIPS, and the short-term outcome of TIPS shunt established by Viatorr stent is similar to that of TIPS shunt established by double-stent technique. Further studies are needed to investigate the advantages of Viatorr stent over double-stent technique.