We have located links that may give you full text access.
Portal Hypertension in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: Diagnostic Accuracy of Spleen Stiffness.
Radiology 2016 May
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of spleen stiffness (SS) and liver stiffness (LS) measured by using acoustic radiation force impulse imaging in the diagnosis of portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis, with the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) as a reference standard.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained for this prospective single-center study. From February 2012 to August 2013, 60 patients with liver cirrhosis (mean age, 70.8 years; age range, 34-88 years; 34 men, 26 women) with HVPG, LS, and SS measurements and gastrointestinal endoscopy and laboratory data were included if they met the following criteria: no recent episodes of gastrointestinal bleeding, no history of splenectomy, no history of partial splenic embolization, no history of β-blocker therapy, and absence of portal thrombosis. The efficacy of the parameters for the evaluation of portal hypertension was analyzed by using the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: The correlation coefficient between SS and HVPG (r = 0.876) was significantly better than that between LS and HVPG (r = 0.609, P < .0001). The areas under the ROC curve of SS for the identification of clinically important portal hypertension (HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg), severe portal hypertension (HVPG ≥ 12 mm Hg), esophageal varices (EVs), and high-risk EVs were significantly higher (0.943, 0.963, 0.937, and 0.955, respectively) than those of LS, spleen diameter, platelet count, and platelet count to spleen diameter ratio (P < .05 for all). SS could be used to accurately rule out the presence of clinically important portal hypertension, severe portal hypertension, EVs, and high-risk EVs (negative likelihood ratios, 0.051, 0.056, 0.054, and 0.074, respectively).
CONCLUSION: SS is reliable and has better diagnostic performance than LS for identifying portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and informed consent were obtained for this prospective single-center study. From February 2012 to August 2013, 60 patients with liver cirrhosis (mean age, 70.8 years; age range, 34-88 years; 34 men, 26 women) with HVPG, LS, and SS measurements and gastrointestinal endoscopy and laboratory data were included if they met the following criteria: no recent episodes of gastrointestinal bleeding, no history of splenectomy, no history of partial splenic embolization, no history of β-blocker therapy, and absence of portal thrombosis. The efficacy of the parameters for the evaluation of portal hypertension was analyzed by using the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.
RESULTS: The correlation coefficient between SS and HVPG (r = 0.876) was significantly better than that between LS and HVPG (r = 0.609, P < .0001). The areas under the ROC curve of SS for the identification of clinically important portal hypertension (HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg), severe portal hypertension (HVPG ≥ 12 mm Hg), esophageal varices (EVs), and high-risk EVs were significantly higher (0.943, 0.963, 0.937, and 0.955, respectively) than those of LS, spleen diameter, platelet count, and platelet count to spleen diameter ratio (P < .05 for all). SS could be used to accurately rule out the presence of clinically important portal hypertension, severe portal hypertension, EVs, and high-risk EVs (negative likelihood ratios, 0.051, 0.056, 0.054, and 0.074, respectively).
CONCLUSION: SS is reliable and has better diagnostic performance than LS for identifying portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app