Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus H-graft portacaval shunt in the management of bleeding varices: A cost-benefit analysis

• Published in: Surgery 1997-10, Vol.122 (4), p.794-800
• Main Authors: Rosemurgy, Alexander S, Bloomston, Mark, Zervos, Emmanuel E, Goode, Sarah E, Pencev, Dobrimir, Zweibel, Bruce, Black, Thomas J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Esophageal and Gastric Varices - economics; Esophageal and Gastric Varices - physiopathology; Esophageal and Gastric Varices - surgery; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Length of Stay; Liver Cirrhosis - complications; Male; Middle Aged; Portasystemic Shunt, Surgical - economics; Portasystemic Shunt, Surgical - mortality; Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic - economics; Portasystemic Shunt, Transjugular Intrahepatic - mortality; Postoperative Complications - economics; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Recurrence; Severity of Illness Index
• ISSN: 0039-6060; 1532-7361
• DOI: 10.1016/S0039-6060(97)90089-1

Background . Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is popular in treating portal hypertension because of its perceived efficacy and cost benefits, although it has never been compared with surgical shunting in a cost-benefit analysis. This study was undertaken to determine the cost benefit of TIPS versus small-diameter prosthetic H-graft portacaval shunt (HGPCS). Methods . Cost of care was determined in 80 patients prospectively randomized to receive TIPS or HGPCS as definitive treatment for bleeding varices, beginning with shunt placement and including subsequent admissions for complications or follow-up related to shunting. Results . Patients were similar in age, gender, severity of illness/liver dysfunction, and urgency of shunting. After TIPS or HGPCS, variceal rehemorrhage (8 versus 0, respectively; p = 0.03), shunt occlusion (13 versus 4; p = 0.03), shunt revision (16 versus 4; p < 0.005), and shunt failure (18 versus 10; p = 0.10) were compared; all were more common after TIPS. Through the index admission, TIPS cost $48,188 ± $43,355 whereas HGPCS cost $61,522 ± $47,615. With follow-up, TIPS cost $69,276 ± $52,712 and HGPCS cost $66,034 ± $49,118. Conclusions . Early cost of TIPS was less than, though not different from, cost of HGPCS. With followup, costs after TIPS mounted. The initially lower cost of TIPS is offset by higher rates of subsequent occlusion and rehemorrhage.