Belén Martinez-Moreno, Juan Martínez Martínez, Iván Herrera, Lucía Guilabert, María Rodríguez-Soler, Pablo Bellot, Cayetano Miralles, Sonia Pascual, Javier Irúrzun, Pedro Zapater, José María Palazón-Azorín, Vicente Gil Guillén, Rodrigo Jover, José R Aparicio
{"title":"EUS 引导下的门静脉压力梯度测量与肝静脉压力梯度的相关性：一项前瞻性研究。","authors":"Belén Martinez-Moreno, Juan Martínez Martínez, Iván Herrera, Lucía Guilabert, María Rodríguez-Soler, Pablo Bellot, Cayetano Miralles, Sonia Pascual, Javier Irúrzun, Pedro Zapater, José María Palazón-Azorín, Vicente Gil Guillén, Rodrigo Jover, José R Aparicio","doi":"10.1055/a-2369-0759","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hepatic venous portal gradient (HVPG) measurement remains the gold standard for estimating portal pressure gradient (PPG). This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided PPG and HVPG in patients with chronic portal hypertension.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with chronic portal hypertension in whom HVPG assessment was clinically indicated were invited to undergo transjugular HVPG and EUS-PPG with a 22-G needle in separate sessions for comparison. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method were used to evaluate the agreement between techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>33 patients were included. No significant differences in technical success were observed: EUS-PPG (31/33, 93.9%) vs. HVPG (31/33, 93.9%). Overall, 30 patients who underwent successful EUS-PPG and HVPG were analyzed. Correlation between the two techniques showed an ICC of 0.82 (0.65-0.91). Four patients had major discrepancies (≥5 mmHg) between HVPG and EUS-PPG. No significant differences in adverse events were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The correlation between EUS-PPG and HVPG was almost perfect. EUS-PPG could be a safe and reliable method for direct PPG measurement in patients with cirrhosis and a valid alternative to HVPG.</p>","PeriodicalId":11516,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopy","volume":" ","pages":"62-67"},"PeriodicalIF":11.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correlation of endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurements with hepatic venous pressure gradient: a prospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Belén Martinez-Moreno, Juan Martínez Martínez, Iván Herrera, Lucía Guilabert, María Rodríguez-Soler, Pablo Bellot, Cayetano Miralles, Sonia Pascual, Javier Irúrzun, Pedro Zapater, José María Palazón-Azorín, Vicente Gil Guillén, Rodrigo Jover, José R Aparicio\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2369-0759\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hepatic venous portal gradient (HVPG) measurement remains the gold standard for estimating portal pressure gradient (PPG). This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided PPG and HVPG in patients with chronic portal hypertension.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with chronic portal hypertension in whom HVPG assessment was clinically indicated were invited to undergo transjugular HVPG and EUS-PPG with a 22-G needle in separate sessions for comparison. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method were used to evaluate the agreement between techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>33 patients were included. No significant differences in technical success were observed: EUS-PPG (31/33, 93.9%) vs. HVPG (31/33, 93.9%). Overall, 30 patients who underwent successful EUS-PPG and HVPG were analyzed. Correlation between the two techniques showed an ICC of 0.82 (0.65-0.91). Four patients had major discrepancies (≥5 mmHg) between HVPG and EUS-PPG. No significant differences in adverse events were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The correlation between EUS-PPG and HVPG was almost perfect. EUS-PPG could be a safe and reliable method for direct PPG measurement in patients with cirrhosis and a valid alternative to HVPG.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11516,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"62-67\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2369-0759\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2369-0759","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Correlation of endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurements with hepatic venous pressure gradient: a prospective study.
Background: Hepatic venous portal gradient (HVPG) measurement remains the gold standard for estimating portal pressure gradient (PPG). This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided PPG and HVPG in patients with chronic portal hypertension.
Methods: Patients with chronic portal hypertension in whom HVPG assessment was clinically indicated were invited to undergo transjugular HVPG and EUS-PPG with a 22-G needle in separate sessions for comparison. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Bland-Altman method were used to evaluate the agreement between techniques.
Results: 33 patients were included. No significant differences in technical success were observed: EUS-PPG (31/33, 93.9%) vs. HVPG (31/33, 93.9%). Overall, 30 patients who underwent successful EUS-PPG and HVPG were analyzed. Correlation between the two techniques showed an ICC of 0.82 (0.65-0.91). Four patients had major discrepancies (≥5 mmHg) between HVPG and EUS-PPG. No significant differences in adverse events were observed.
Conclusions: The correlation between EUS-PPG and HVPG was almost perfect. EUS-PPG could be a safe and reliable method for direct PPG measurement in patients with cirrhosis and a valid alternative to HVPG.
期刊介绍：
Endoscopy is a leading journal covering the latest technologies and global advancements in gastrointestinal endoscopy. With guidance from an international editorial board, it delivers high-quality content catering to the needs of endoscopists, surgeons, clinicians, and researchers worldwide. Publishing 12 issues each year, Endoscopy offers top-quality review articles, original contributions, prospective studies, surveys of diagnostic and therapeutic advances, and comprehensive coverage of key national and international meetings. Additionally, articles often include supplementary online video content.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
