Clinics and research in hepatology and gastroenterology · 2023
Individual and population screening of varices needing treatment by a simple, safe and accurate test.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Ravaioli Federico, Berger Arthur, Farcau Oana, Colecchia Antonio, Stefanescu Horia, Candillier Camille, Nahon Pierre, Bureau Christophe, Ganne-Carriè Nathalie, Berzigotti Annalisa, de Ledinghen Victor, Petta Salvatore, Calès Paul, Multicentric Groups, Bologna, Cluj, Bondy, Toulouse, Bern, Bordeaux, Palermo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Several tests have been developed to screen varices needing treatment (VNT) in different screening settings. We aimed to develop simple estimators to quantify VNT risk and spare endoscopy while missing <5% of VNT, adapted to different screenings in the main etiologies.
METHODS: 2,368 patients with chronic liver disease were included. The main VNT predictors were platelets, prothrombin index (PI) and LSM. Their interactions led to score construction, LIP: (LSM*45)/(PI*platelets), and BLIP: BMI-adjusted LIP in NAFLD. Scores were categorized either for population (VNT sensitivity ≥95%) or individual (negative predictive value ≥95%) VNT screening.
RESULTS: 1) Scores diagnosing VNT. AUROCs were, PLER: 0.767 Anticipate: 0.773 (p=0.059 vs previous), LIP: 0.779 (p=0.136), PLEASE: 0.789 (p=0.196). 2) Population screening performance was in increasing order (with missed VNT rate), Baveno6 criteria: 23.9% (2.5%), Anticipate: 24.5%, p=0.367 vs previous (3.3%), PLER: 27.3%, p<0.001 (3.6%), LIP: 33.4%, p<0.001 (4.2%), PLEASE: 35.2%, p=0.006 (3.6%). In NAFLD, LIP: 38.6%, BLIP: 40.8%, p=0.038. 3) Individual screening performance was, expanded Baveno6 criteria: 42.7%, LIP: 54.1%, p<0.001. In NAFLD, performance was, NAFLD-cirrhosis criteria: 66.7%, BLIP: 74.6%, p<0.001.
CONCLUSION: LIP combined simplicity, performance and safety in each etiology. In NAFLD, BMI-adjusted LIP outperformed other tests.
METHODS: 2,368 patients with chronic liver disease were included. The main VNT predictors were platelets, prothrombin index (PI) and LSM. Their interactions led to score construction, LIP: (LSM*45)/(PI*platelets), and BLIP: BMI-adjusted LIP in NAFLD. Scores were categorized either for population (VNT sensitivity ≥95%) or individual (negative predictive value ≥95%) VNT screening.
RESULTS: 1) Scores diagnosing VNT. AUROCs were, PLER: 0.767 Anticipate: 0.773 (p=0.059 vs previous), LIP: 0.779 (p=0.136), PLEASE: 0.789 (p=0.196). 2) Population screening performance was in increasing order (with missed VNT rate), Baveno6 criteria: 23.9% (2.5%), Anticipate: 24.5%, p=0.367 vs previous (3.3%), PLER: 27.3%, p<0.001 (3.6%), LIP: 33.4%, p<0.001 (4.2%), PLEASE: 35.2%, p=0.006 (3.6%). In NAFLD, LIP: 38.6%, BLIP: 40.8%, p=0.038. 3) Individual screening performance was, expanded Baveno6 criteria: 42.7%, LIP: 54.1%, p<0.001. In NAFLD, performance was, NAFLD-cirrhosis criteria: 66.7%, BLIP: 74.6%, p<0.001.
CONCLUSION: LIP combined simplicity, performance and safety in each etiology. In NAFLD, BMI-adjusted LIP outperformed other tests.