Maria Stafylidou1, Paschalis Paschos2, Anastasia Katsoula3, Konstantinos Malandris3, Konstantinos Ioakim4, Eleni Bekiari3, Anna-Bettina Haidich5, Evangelos Akriviadis6, Apostolos Tsapas7. 1. First Department of Internal Medicine, Papageorgiou Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. Electronic address: maria_staf@yahoo.gr. 2. First Department of Internal Medicine, Papageorgiou Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece; Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 3. Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 4. First Department of Internal Medicine, Papageorgiou Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 5. Department of Hygiene, Social-Preventive Medicine and Medical Statistics, Medical School, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 6. Fourth Department of Internal Medicine, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece. 7. Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece; Harris Manchester College, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: We aimed to assess the accuracy of Baveno VI criteria for identification of high-risk varices (HRVs) and varices of any size in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD). METHODS: We performed a systematic search of publications through December 2018 for studies that assessed the accuracy of Baveno VI criteria for screening for varices in patients with cACLD. We used hierarchical models to synthesize evidence. We also conducted a post hoc analysis to assess the accuracy of Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria. We appraised the confidence in estimates using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: We identified 30 studies (8469 participants). Pooled values of Baveno VI criteria for HRVs (26 studies) were a sensitivity of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98) and a specificity of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.26-0.39). Pooled sensitivity of Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria for HRVs (12 studies) was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.93) and specificity was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.45-0.57). In 1000 patients with cACLD, with a prevalence of HRVs of 20%, Baveno VI criteria would prevent endoscopy in 262 patients, but 6 patients with HRVs would be missed. Instead, use of the Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria would result in 428 patients avoiding endoscopy, but 20 patients with HRVs would be missed. The credibility of our findings is moderate or low, mainly owing to the retrospective design of most studies. CONCLUSIONS: Baveno VI criteria have high diagnostic accuracy as a triage test for screening for HRVs in patients with cACLD. Expanded Baveno VI criteria could reduce the proportion of unnecessary endoscopies further, nevertheless with a higher rate of missed HRVs.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: We aimed to assess the accuracy of Baveno VI criteria for identification of high-risk varices (HRVs) and varices of any size in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD). METHODS: We performed a systematic search of publications through December 2018 for studies that assessed the accuracy of Baveno VI criteria for screening for varices in patients with cACLD. We used hierarchical models to synthesize evidence. We also conducted a post hoc analysis to assess the accuracy of Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria. We appraised the confidence in estimates using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: We identified 30 studies (8469 participants). Pooled values of Baveno VI criteria for HRVs (26 studies) were a sensitivity of 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98) and a specificity of 0.32 (95% CI, 0.26-0.39). Pooled sensitivity of Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria for HRVs (12 studies) was 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.93) and specificity was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.45-0.57). In 1000 patients with cACLD, with a prevalence of HRVs of 20%, Baveno VI criteria would prevent endoscopy in 262 patients, but 6 patients with HRVs would be missed. Instead, use of the Εxpanded Baveno VI criteria would result in 428 patients avoiding endoscopy, but 20 patients with HRVs would be missed. The credibility of our findings is moderate or low, mainly owing to the retrospective design of most studies. CONCLUSIONS: Baveno VI criteria have high diagnostic accuracy as a triage test for screening for HRVs in patients with cACLD. Expanded Baveno VI criteria could reduce the proportion of unnecessary endoscopies further, nevertheless with a higher rate of missed HRVs.
Authors: Jason Pik Eu Chang; Yu Jun Wong; Wei Lyn Yang; Kieron Boon Leng Lim; Poh Seng Tan; Gim Hin Ho; Benjamin Cherng Hann Yip; James Weiquan Li; Chern Hao Chong; David Eng Hui Ong; Tju Siang Chua; Charles Kien Fong Vu; Kok Ann Gwee; Tiing Leong Ang; Chee Kiat Tan Journal: Singapore Med J Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 1.858
Authors: Michael Colwill; Luke Lake; Ahmed El-Sayed; Jonathan King; Rawen Kader; Eathar Shakweh; Andra Caracostea; Louise China; James Maurice Journal: Future Healthc J Date: 2022-03
Authors: Konstantinos Gkiouras; Maria G Grammatikopoulou; Xenophon Theodoridis; Eirini Pagkalidou; Evangelia Chatzikyriakou; Anna G Apostolidou; Eirini I Rigopoulou; Lazaros I Sakkas; Dimitrios Petrou Bogdanos Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2020-01-14 Impact factor: 5.742