Endoscopic ultrasound · 2025
EUS-guided portal pressure gradient measurement for evaluating the severity of portal hypertension: A retrospective analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Luo Rongkun, Chen Mingcong, Lu Huanyuan, Zhang Rui, Luo Hongwu, Liu Yinghong, Liu Xunyang, Huang Feizhou, Deng Gang, Lei Zhao
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: EUS-guided portal pressure gradient (EUS-PPG) measurement has been proposed as a novel direct manometry to quantify portal hypertension. This study aimed to explore the ability of EUS-PPG measurements to evaluate the severity of portal hypertension.
METHODS: The clinical features of patients with diagnosed cirrhosis or chronic liver disease who underwent EUS-PPG measurement at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. The correlations between the clinical features of portal hypertension and the EUS-PPG measurements were analyzed, and then receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the ability of the EUS-PPG measurements to evaluate disease severity.
RESULTS: A total of 197 patients were included in this study. The EUS-PPG measurements varied significantly among patients categorized by gastroesophageal varices, red signs, variceal bleeding, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, thrombocytopenia, hypoproteinemia, prothrombin time, international normalized ratio, or Child-Pugh grade (P < 0.05). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for gastroesophageal varices, decompensated cirrhosis, ascites, and recent variceal bleeding were 0.919, 0.847, 0.813, and 0.804, respectively (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the optimal EUS-PPG cutoff values for gastroesophageal varices, decompensated cirrhosis, ascites, and recent variceal bleeding were 11.5 mm Hg (sensitivity = 80.3%, specificity = 89.5%), 12.75 mm Hg (sensitivity = 77.8%, specificity = 76.7%), 15.75 mm Hg (sensitivity = 66.7%, specificity = 83.1%), and 16.75 mm Hg (sensitivity = 76.2%, specificity = 70.1%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-PPG measurement seems to be an effective technique for assessing disease severity and risk of variceal bleeding in patients with diagnosed cirrhosis or chronic liver disease.
METHODS: The clinical features of patients with diagnosed cirrhosis or chronic liver disease who underwent EUS-PPG measurement at a single center were retrospectively analyzed. The correlations between the clinical features of portal hypertension and the EUS-PPG measurements were analyzed, and then receiver operating characteristic curves were used to evaluate the ability of the EUS-PPG measurements to evaluate disease severity.
RESULTS: A total of 197 patients were included in this study. The EUS-PPG measurements varied significantly among patients categorized by gastroesophageal varices, red signs, variceal bleeding, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, thrombocytopenia, hypoproteinemia, prothrombin time, international normalized ratio, or Child-Pugh grade (P < 0.05). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves for gastroesophageal varices, decompensated cirrhosis, ascites, and recent variceal bleeding were 0.919, 0.847, 0.813, and 0.804, respectively (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the optimal EUS-PPG cutoff values for gastroesophageal varices, decompensated cirrhosis, ascites, and recent variceal bleeding were 11.5 mm Hg (sensitivity = 80.3%, specificity = 89.5%), 12.75 mm Hg (sensitivity = 77.8%, specificity = 76.7%), 15.75 mm Hg (sensitivity = 66.7%, specificity = 83.1%), and 16.75 mm Hg (sensitivity = 76.2%, specificity = 70.1%), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: EUS-PPG measurement seems to be an effective technique for assessing disease severity and risk of variceal bleeding in patients with diagnosed cirrhosis or chronic liver disease.