U Thalheimer1, G Leandro, D N Samonakis, C K Triantos, D Patch, A K Burroughs. 1. Liver Transplantation and Hepatobiliary Medicine Unit, Royal Free Hospital, Pond Street, NW3 2QG London, UK; Internal Medicine Dept., Policlinico G.B. Rossi, Piazzale L.A. Scuro, Verona, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Measuring wedged hepatic venous pressure and hepatic venous pressure gradient as indices of portal pressure is being increasingly used in assessing the prognosis and response to pharmacological treatment for portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients. AIM: To re-evaluate the agreement and correlation between wedged hepatic pressures and directly measured portal pressures. METHODS: Medline search for studies comparing direct portal with wedged hepatic pressure measurement and assessment of correlation and agreement of the pooled data. RESULTS: Eleven suitable studies included 320 patients. Coefficient of determination (r2) was 0.87 in all patients, 0.87 in 102 patients with alcoholic liver disease, 0.83 in 88 patients with non-alcoholic liver disease and 0.75 in 53 patients with hepatitis C-related liver disease. Coefficient of determination was 0.85 in the 194 patients in whom a wedge catheter and 0.90 in the 113 patients in whom a balloon catheter was used. Agreement according to the method of Bland and Altman was also found to be good, with only 4-8% of the measurements outside 2 standard deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Wedged hepatic pressure measurement correlates well with direct portal pressure measurement and the agreement is sufficiently good to use this as a surrogate measurement.
BACKGROUND: Measuring wedged hepatic venous pressure and hepatic venous pressure gradient as indices of portal pressure is being increasingly used in assessing the prognosis and response to pharmacological treatment for portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients. AIM: To re-evaluate the agreement and correlation between wedged hepatic pressures and directly measured portal pressures. METHODS: Medline search for studies comparing direct portal with wedged hepatic pressure measurement and assessment of correlation and agreement of the pooled data. RESULTS: Eleven suitable studies included 320 patients. Coefficient of determination (r2) was 0.87 in all patients, 0.87 in 102 patients with alcoholic liver disease, 0.83 in 88 patients with non-alcoholic liver disease and 0.75 in 53 patients with hepatitis C-related liver disease. Coefficient of determination was 0.85 in the 194 patients in whom a wedge catheter and 0.90 in the 113 patients in whom a balloon catheter was used. Agreement according to the method of Bland and Altman was also found to be good, with only 4-8% of the measurements outside 2 standard deviations. CONCLUSIONS: Wedged hepatic pressure measurement correlates well with direct portal pressure measurement and the agreement is sufficiently good to use this as a surrogate measurement.
Authors: Jonathan Chung-Fai Leung; Thomson Chi-Wang Loong; James Pang; Jeremy Lok Wei; Vincent Wai-Sun Wong Journal: Hepatol Int Date: 2017-03-30 Impact factor: 6.047
Authors: Emily C Bellavance; Kimberly M Lumpkins; Gilles Mentha; Hugo P Marques; Lorenzo Capussotti; Carlo Pulitano; Pietro Majno; Paulo Mira; Laura Rubbia-Brandt; Alessandro Ferrero; Luca Aldrighetti; Steven Cunningham; Nadia Russolillo; Benjamin Philosophe; Eduardo Barroso; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-08-15 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Christian Müller; Maximilian Schöniger-Hekele; Rüdiger Schernthaner; Barbara Renner; Markus Peck-Radosavljevic; Andrea Brichta; Fritz Wrba; Martin Posch; Peter Bauer; Peter Ferenci; Alfred Gangl Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2008 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Antonio Diaz-Sanchez; Oscar Nuñez-Martinez; Cecilia Gonzalez-Asanza; Ana Matilla; Beatriz Merino; Diego Rincon; Inmaculada Beceiro; Maria Vega Catalina; Magdalena Salcedo; Rafael Bañares; Gerardo Clemente Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-10-14 Impact factor: 5.742