Methods: Analysis of the quality of life was performed in 248 patients with LC after PSSh. Mean age was 28, 4 ± 1, 7 years. Distal splenorenal shunts (DSRS) was applied in 135 (54.4%) patients, 113 are made different versions of the central shunt. To assess the quality of life used questionnaire developed by Younossi ZM et al. (1999) – The Chronic Liver Smad inhibitor Disease Questionnaire (CLDQ). Results: Of particular interest is the analysis of the quality of life before and after PSSh. We analyzed a group of 32 patients with LC. Summary results showed
that up to shunting performance was significantly worse than in the periods immediately following the operation. Thus, if the average amount of preoperative score was 114, 1 ± 1, 4, then in terms of 3 months after PSSh – 127, 5 ± 1, 7 (P < 0, 001). In turn, a 6-month observation of quality of life has decreased to 122, 4 ± 1, 8. For
comparing quality of life in cirrhotic patients after PSSh in the control group were included 50 patients. In the near future after PSSh average for all questions was only 4, 4 ± 0, 05 points. Later a significant reduction Dabrafenib in vivo was obtained in time to 3 years – 3, 7 ± 0, 07 points, and to 5 years – 3, 2 ± 0, 10 points. Decline in the relative value of the average score was no different significantly across all domains (uniform reduction curves in 20, 3–25, 8%). Comparative analysis of quality of life on the scale of physical and psychological showed TCL that the progressive deterioration of the quality of life after PSSh also happens to 3–5 years of observation. Conclusion: Whatever
the method of decompression in the remote period after PSSh marked progressive deterioration in quality of life index. On the scale of the physical condition of the questionnaire CLDQ, selective decompression is less value in relation to the central shunts, and on a scale of psychological the opposite pattern with higher values after DSRS. Key Word(s): 1. Liver cirrhosis; 2. Quality of life; 3. Portosystemic shunt; 4. varices; Presenting Author: ARUNKUMAR KRISHNAN Additional Authors: RAVI RAMAKRISHNAN, JAYANTHI VENKATARMAN Corresponding Author: ARUNKUMAR KRISHNAN Objective: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) and stone extraction is the treatment of choice for bile duct stones. Therefore, if ES and conventional stone extraction fail, further treatment is mandatory. Insertion of a biliary endoprosthesis is an effective option. Different endoscopic modalities are available for the extraction of common bile duct stones. However, there is no clear consensus on the better therapeutic approach.