Extremely Small Sample Size (N=8)
With only eight patients, the findings may not be generalizable to a larger population, and it's challenging to draw statistically robust conclusions about the efficacy and safety of TIPS for this condition.
As a retrospective study, it is susceptible to selection bias and information bias, as data was collected from existing records rather than through a controlled, pre-planned protocol, which can affect the reliability of the results.
The results may be specific to the practices, patient demographics, and expertise of a single hospital, limiting their applicability and generalizability to other healthcare settings or diverse patient groups.
Lack of Long-Term Follow-Up
The paper itself acknowledges a lack of long-term follow-up, meaning the durability of the treatment's effects and the full spectrum of potential late complications are not adequately understood.
The study lacks a control group, making it impossible to compare the outcomes of TIPS against alternative treatments or standard medical management. Therefore, improvements cannot be definitively attributed solely to the TIPS procedure, nor can its comparative effectiveness be quantified.