肝硬度评估作为预测急性静脉曲张出血后再出血的肝静脉压力梯度替代方法:一项概念验证研究。

Liver stiffness assessment as an alternative to hepatic venous pressure gradient for predicting rebleed after acute variceal bleed: A proof-of-concept study.

作者信息

Agarwal Samagra, Sharma Sanchit, Anand Abhinav, Gunjan Deepak, Saraya Anoop

机构信息

Department of Gastroenterology and Human Nutrition Unit All India Institute of Medical Sciences New Delhi India.

出版信息

JGH Open. 2020 Nov 9;5(1):73-80. doi: 10.1002/jgh3.12449. eCollection 2021 Jan.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), although an important determinant in predicting rebleeding after an episode of acute variceal bleed (AVB), is seldom utilized in clinical practice. We aimed to study the role of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) after variceal bleeding as a potential noninvasive predictor of rebleed.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of clinical trial of patients undergoing HVPG (postbleed HVPG) and LSM (postbleed LSM) assessment within 3-5 days of index AVB. HVPG response was assessed after 4 weeks of pharmacotherapy. Comparative assessment of long-term rebleeding rates stratified using postbleed LSM, postbleed HVPG, and HVPG response was performed. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was conducted to identify the most appropriate tool for routine use.

RESULTS

Long-term clinical and HVPG response data were available for 48 patients post-AVB, of whom 45 patients had valid postbleed LSM. Rebleeding occurred in 13 (28%) patients over a median follow-up of 4 years with no early rebleeds. Postbleed LSM >30 kPa and baseline HVPG >15 mm Hg were optimal cutoffs for identifying patients at high risk of rebleeding. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curves and competing risk analysis accounting for death showed similar discriminative values for all three stratification tools. At usual risk thresholds, HVPG response had maximum benefit on DCA followed by postbleed LSM. On DCA, 50-60 additional HVPGs were required to detect one additional patient at high risk of rebleed.

CONCLUSION

Liver stiffness measurement during AVB can potentially be used as an alternative to portal pressure indices in decompensated cirrhosis to identify those at high risk of late-onset rebleed.

摘要

背景与目的

肝静脉压力梯度(HVPG)虽是预测急性静脉曲张出血(AVB)发作后再出血的重要决定因素,但在临床实践中很少使用。我们旨在研究静脉曲张出血后肝脏硬度测量(LSM)作为再出血潜在非侵入性预测指标的作用。

方法

这是一项对在首次AVB后3 - 5天内接受HVPG(出血后HVPG)和LSM(出血后LSM)评估的患者进行的临床试验事后分析。药物治疗4周后评估HVPG反应。对根据出血后LSM、出血后HVPG和HVPG反应分层的长期再出血率进行比较评估。进行决策曲线分析(DCA)以确定常规使用的最合适工具。

结果

48例AVB后患者可获得长期临床和HVPG反应数据,其中45例患者有有效的出血后LSM。在中位随访4年期间,13例(28%)患者发生再出血,无早期再出血。出血后LSM>30 kPa和基线HVPG>15 mmHg是识别再出血高风险患者的最佳截断值。考虑死亡因素的时间依赖性受试者工作特征曲线和竞争风险分析显示,所有三种分层工具的判别值相似。在通常的风险阈值下,HVPG反应在DCA上的获益最大,其次是出血后LSM。在DCA中,需要额外进行50 - 60次HVPG检测才能多发现1例再出血高风险患者。

结论

在失代偿期肝硬化的AVB期间,肝脏硬度测量有可能替代门静脉压力指标,以识别迟发性再出血的高风险患者。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ce8e/7812463/bff82fc3f17c/JGH3-5-73-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索