Xu H F, Wang Y, He F L, Fan Z H, Liu H, Yang Y P, Jia J D, Liu F Q, Ding H G
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Beijing You'an Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, China.
Liver Research Center, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100050, China.
Zhonghua Gan Zang Bing Za Zhi. 2022 Oct 20;30(10):1092-1099. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501113-20210126-00044.
To verify Baveno VI criteria, Expanded-Baveno VI criteria, liver stiffness×spleen diameter-to-platelet ratio risk score (LSPS), and platelet count/spleen diameter ratio (PSR) in evaluating the severity value of esophageal varices (EV) in patients with non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH). 111 cases of NCPH and 204 cases of hepatitis B cirrhosis who met the diagnostic criteria were included in the study. NCPH included 70 cases of idiopathic non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (INCPH) and 41 cases of nontumoral portal vein thrombosis (PVT). According to the severity of EV on endoscopy, they were divided into the low-bleeding-risk group (no/mild EV) and the high-bleeding-risk group (moderate/severe EV). The diagnostic value of Baveno VI and Expanded-Baveno VI criteria was verified to evaluate the value of LSPS and PSR for EV bleeding risk severity in NCPH patients. The t-test or Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the measurement data between groups. Comparisons between counting data groups were performed using either the test or the Fisher exact probability method. Considering endoscopy was the gold standard for diagnosis, the missed diagnosis rates of low/high bleeding risk EVs in INCPH/PVT patients with Baveno VI and Expanded-Baveno VI criteria were 50.0%/30.0% and 53.8%/50.0%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in platelet count (PLT), spleen diameter, liver stiffness (LSM), LSPS, and PSR between low-bleeding-risk and high-bleeding-risk groups in INCPH patients, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of LSPS and PSR was 0.564 and 0.592, respectively (=0.372 and 0.202, respectively). There were statistically significant differences in PLT, spleen diameter, LSPS, and PSR between the low and high-bleeding risk groups in PVT patients, and the AUCs of LSPS and PSR were 0.796 and 0.833 (=0.003 and 0.001, respectively). In patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis, the Baveno VI and Expanded-Baveno VI criteria were used to verify the low bleeding risk EV, and the missed diagnosis rates were 0 and 5.4%, respectively. There were statistically significant differences in PLT, spleen diameter, LSM, LSPS and PSR between the low-bleeding-risk and high-bleeding-risk groups (<0.001). LSPS and PSR AUC were 0.867 and 0.789, respectively (<0.05). Baveno VI and Expanded-Baveno VI criteria have a high missed diagnosis rate for EVs with low bleeding risk in patients with INPCH and PVT, while LSPS and PSR have certain value in evaluating EV bleeding risk in PVT patients, which requires further clinical research.
为验证巴韦诺VI标准、扩展巴韦诺VI标准、肝硬度×脾直径与血小板比值风险评分(LSPS)以及血小板计数/脾直径比值(PSR)在评估非肝硬化门静脉高压(NCPH)患者食管静脉曲张(EV)严重程度方面的价值。本研究纳入了111例符合诊断标准的NCPH患者和204例乙型肝炎肝硬化患者。NCPH包括70例特发性非肝硬化门静脉高压(INCPH)和41例非肿瘤性门静脉血栓形成(PVT)。根据内镜检查时EV的严重程度,将患者分为低出血风险组(无/轻度EV)和高出血风险组(中度/重度EV)。验证巴韦诺VI和扩展巴韦诺VI标准在评估LSPS和PSR对NCPH患者EV出血风险严重程度的价值。采用t检验或曼-惠特尼U检验比较组间计量资料。计数资料组间比较采用检验或Fisher确切概率法。考虑到内镜检查是诊断的金标准,巴韦诺VI和扩展巴韦诺VI标准在INCPH/PVT患者中低/高出血风险EV的漏诊率分别为50.0%/30.0%和53.8%/50.0%。INCPH患者低出血风险组和高出血风险组之间的血小板计数(PLT)、脾直径、肝硬度(LSM)、LSPS和PSR无统计学差异,LSPS和PSR的受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.564和0.592(分别为=0.372和0.202)。PVT患者低出血风险组和高出血风险组之间的PLT、脾直径、LSPS和PSR有统计学差异,LSPS和PSR的AUC分别为0.796和0.833(分别为=0.003和0.001)。在乙型肝炎肝硬化患者中,采用巴韦诺VI和扩展巴韦诺VI标准验证低出血风险EV,漏诊率分别为0和5.4%。低出血风险组和高出血风险组之间的PLT、脾直径、LSM、LSPS和PSR有统计学差异(<0.001)。LSPS和PSR的AUC分别为0.867和0.789(<0.05)。巴韦诺VI和扩展巴韦诺VI标准在INPCH和PVT患者中对低出血风险的EV漏诊率较高,而LSPS和PSR在评估PVT患者的EV出血风险方面有一定价值,这需要进一步的临床研究。