Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 353

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Randomized controlled study of TIPS versus paracentesis plus albumin in cirrhosis with severe ascites

Open access
Salerno, Francesco, Merli, Manuela, Riggio, Oliviero, Cazzaniga, Massimo, Valeriano, Valentina, Pozzi, Massimo, Nicolini, Antonio, Salvatori, Filippo·2004·Hepatology

Abstract

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been shown to be effective in the control of refractory or recidivant ascites. However, the effect of TIPS on survival as compared with that of large-volume paracentesis plus albumin is uncertain. A multicenter, prospective, clinical trial was performed in 66 patients with cirrhosis and refractory or recidivant ascites (16 Child-Turcotte-Pugh class B and 50 Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C) randomly assigned to treatment with TIPS (n = 33) or with large-volume paracentesis plus human albumin (n = 33). The primary endpoint was survival without liver transplantation. Secondary endpoints were treatment failure, rehospitalization, and occurrence of complications. Thirteen patients treated with TIPS and 20 patients treated with paracentesis died during the study period, 4 patients in each group underwent liver transplantation. The probability of survival without transplantation was 77% at 1 year and 59% at 2 years in the TIPS group as compared with 52% and 29% in the paracentesis group (P = .021). In a multivariate analysis, treatment with paracentesis and higher MELD score showed to independently predict death. Treatment failure was more frequent in patients assigned to paracentesis, whereas severe episodes of hepatic encephalopathy occurred more frequently in patients assigned to TIPS. The number and duration of rehospitalizations were similar in the two groups. In conclusion, compared to large-volume paracentesis plus albumin, TIPS improves survival without liver transplantation in patients with refractory or recidivant ascites. (Hepatology 2004;40:629-635.)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hep.20364

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 353

Metadata

Authors
Salerno, F., Merli, M., Riggio, O., Cazzaniga, M., Valeriano, V., Pozzi, M., Nicolini, A., & Salvatori, F.
Venue
Hepatology
Published
2004-09
Volume
40
Issue
3
Pages
629-635
ISSN
0270-9139 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2015839847
Cited by
353
References
0
FWCI
14.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Randomized controlled study of TIPS versus paracentesis plus albumin in cirrhosis with severe ascites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hep.20364
The paper
Salerno, F., Merli, M., Riggio, O., Cazzaniga, M., Valeriano, V., Pozzi, M., Nicolini, A., & Salvatori, F. (2004). Randomized controlled study of TIPS versus paracentesis plus albumin in cirrhosis with severe ascites. Hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.20364

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.