OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of routine helical liver CT in the detection and grading of esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 67 consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent both upper endoscopy and helical liver CT within a 4-week interval were evaluated. The CT protocol included unenhanced, arterial, and portal phases with a collimation of 7-7.5 mm. Two blinded abdominal imagers (6 and 7 years' experience) retrospectively interpreted all CT images to detect the presence of esophageal varices on a 5-point confidence scale and measure the largest varix identified. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed, and the correlation between CT measurements and endoscopic grading, the reference standard, was assessed. RESULTS: The variceal detection rates for the observers was 92% (11/12) and 92% (11/12) for large (i.e., clinically significant) varices, 53% (16/30) and 60% (18/30) for small varices, and 64% (27/42) and 69% (29/42) for all varices. The area under the ROC curve for the detection of esophageal varices of any size was 0.77 (observer 1) and 0.80 (observer 2). CT variceal grading showed a strong correlation with endoscopic grading for both observers (p < or = 0.001). Using a variceal diameter threshold of 3 mm on CT, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for distinguishing large esophageal varices from small or no varices were 92% (11/12), 84% (46/55), and 85% (57/67), respectively, for both observers. CONCLUSION: Liver CT is useful for the detection and grading of esophageal varices. A diameter of 3 mm may be an appropriate screening threshold for large clinically significant varices.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of routine helical liver CT in the detection and grading of esophageal varices in cirrhotic patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 67 consecutive cirrhotic patients who underwent both upper endoscopy and helical liver CT within a 4-week interval were evaluated. The CT protocol included unenhanced, arterial, and portal phases with a collimation of 7-7.5 mm. Two blinded abdominal imagers (6 and 7 years' experience) retrospectively interpreted all CT images to detect the presence of esophageal varices on a 5-point confidence scale and measure the largest varix identified. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed, and the correlation between CT measurements and endoscopic grading, the reference standard, was assessed. RESULTS: The variceal detection rates for the observers was 92% (11/12) and 92% (11/12) for large (i.e., clinically significant) varices, 53% (16/30) and 60% (18/30) for small varices, and 64% (27/42) and 69% (29/42) for all varices. The area under the ROC curve for the detection of esophageal varices of any size was 0.77 (observer 1) and 0.80 (observer 2). CT variceal grading showed a strong correlation with endoscopic grading for both observers (p < or = 0.001). Using a variceal diameter threshold of 3 mm on CT, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for distinguishing large esophageal varices from small or no varices were 92% (11/12), 84% (46/55), and 85% (57/67), respectively, for both observers. CONCLUSION: Liver CT is useful for the detection and grading of esophageal varices. A diameter of 3 mm may be an appropriate screening threshold for large clinically significant varices.
Authors: Fumio Chikamori; Seigo Nishida; Gennaro Selvaggi; Panagiotis Tryphonopoulos; Jang I Moon; David M Levi; Tomoaki Kato; Eddie R Island; Akira Maki; Akin Tekin; Andreas G Tzakis Journal: World J Surg Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Mariaelena Occhipinti; Benedikt H Heidinger; Elisa Franquet; Ronald L Eisenberg; Alexander A Bankier Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Michael J Lipp; Arkady Broder; David Hudesman; Pauline Suwandhi; Steven A Okon; Mitchell Horowitz; David J Clain; Patricia Friedmann; Albert D Min Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2011-03-06 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Ma Somsouk; Katherine To'o; Mujtaba Ali; Eric Vittinghoff; Benjamin M Yeh; Judy Yee; Alex Monto; John M Inadomi; Rizwan Aslam Journal: Abdom Imaging Date: 2014-04