Total shunt vs endoscopic intervention: All‐cause mortality
It is very uncertain whether total shunt changes all‐cause mortality compared with endoscopic intervention (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Total shunt vs endoscopic intervention All‐cause mortality · participants with cirrhosis and with previous oesophagogastric variceal bleeding It is very uncertain whether total shunt changes all‐cause mortality compared with endoscopic intervention (very low certainty). Portosystemic shunts versus endoscopic intervention with or without medical treatment for prevention of… (2020) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.46 [0.19, 1.13] | 3 studies · 164 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Portosystemic shunts versus endoscopic intervention with or without medical treatment for prevention of rebleeding in people with cirrhosis 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.