Selective distal splenorenal shunt versus side-to-side portacaval shunt : Clinical results of a prospective, controlled study

A prospective, controlled study comparing the clinical results of the selective distal splenorenal shunt procedure and the side-to-side portacaval shunt procedure was undertaken in 1980. Ninety-three cirrhotic patients with previous episodes of bleeding from esophageal varices underwent a distal splenorenal shunt procedure (46 patients) or a portacaval shunt procedure (47 patients). The operative mortality rate was 2 percent in both groups. The intraoperative decrease of portal hypertension after the portacaval shunt procedure was higher than after the distal splenorenal shunt procedure (p<0.05), and in those with patent shunts, there was a 0 percent incidence of early variceal rebleeding after the portacaval shunt procedure compared with a 9 percent incidence after the distal splenorenal shunt procedure (p<0.05). Both shunts, however, had similarly satisfactory results in preventing long-term variceal rebleeding (portacaval shunt 2 percent and distal splenorenal shunt 0 percent). Postoperative ascites was more common after the distal splenorenal shunt procedure (58 percent versus 24 percent; p<0.01). Analysis of actuarial survival curves showed no difference between the two procedures. The incidences of long-term episodes of chronic encephalopathy were not statistically different after both procedures. The only three instances of severe encephalopathy occurred in patients with the portacaval shunt (p<0.05). The distal splenorenal shunt also seemed to have a less negative effect on postoperative liver function than the portacaval shunt. These data suggest that the selective shunt should be viewed as a first choice strategy in the treatment of portal hypertension.