OBJECTIVES: Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is considered the standard in quantifying portal hypertension, but can be unreliable in dialysis patients. A noninvasive ultrasound technique, subharmonic-aided pressure estimation (SHAPE), may be a valuable surrogate of these pressure estimates. This study compared SHAPE and HVPG with pathology findings for fibrosis in dialysis patients. METHODS: This was a subgroup study from an IRB-approved trial that included 20 patients on dialysis undergoing SHAPE examinations of portal and hepatic veins using a modified Logiq 9 scanner (GE, Waukesha, WI), during infusion of Sonazoid (GE Healthcare, Oslo, Norway). SHAPE was compared to HVPG and pathology findings using the Ludwig-Batts scoring system for fibrosis. Logistic regression, ROC analysis, and t-tests were used to compare HVPG and SHAPE with pathological findings of fibrosis. RESULTS: Of 20 cases, 5 had HVPG values corresponding to subclinical and clinical portal hypertension (≥6 and ≥10 mmHg, respectively) while 15 had normal HVPG values (≤5 mmHg). SHAPE and HVPG correlated moderately (r = 0.45; P = .047). SHAPE showed a trend toward correlating with fibrosis (r = 0.42; P = .068), while HVPG did not (r = 0.18; P = .45). SHAPE could differentiate between mild (stage 0-1) and moderate to severe (stage 2-4) fibrosis (-10.4 ± 4.9 dB versus -5.4 ± 3.2 dB; P = .035), HVPG could not (3.0 ± 0.6 mmHg versus 4.8 ± 0.7 mmHg; P = .30). ROC curves showed a diagnostic accuracy for SHAPE of 80%, while HVPG reached 76%. CONCLUSION: Liver fibrosis staging in dialysis patients evaluated for portal hypertension appears to be more accurately predicted by SHAPE than by HVPG; albeit in a small sample size.
OBJECTIVES: Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is considered the standard in quantifying portal hypertension, but can be unreliable in dialysis patients. A noninvasive ultrasound technique, subharmonic-aided pressure estimation (SHAPE), may be a valuable surrogate of these pressure estimates. This study compared SHAPE and HVPG with pathology findings for fibrosis in dialysis patients. METHODS: This was a subgroup study from an IRB-approved trial that included 20 patients on dialysis undergoing SHAPE examinations of portal and hepatic veins using a modified Logiq 9 scanner (GE, Waukesha, WI), during infusion of Sonazoid (GE Healthcare, Oslo, Norway). SHAPE was compared to HVPG and pathology findings using the Ludwig-Batts scoring system for fibrosis. Logistic regression, ROC analysis, and t-tests were used to compare HVPG and SHAPE with pathological findings of fibrosis. RESULTS: Of 20 cases, 5 had HVPG values corresponding to subclinical and clinical portal hypertension (≥6 and ≥10 mmHg, respectively) while 15 had normal HVPG values (≤5 mmHg). SHAPE and HVPG correlated moderately (r = 0.45; P = .047). SHAPE showed a trend toward correlating with fibrosis (r = 0.42; P = .068), while HVPG did not (r = 0.18; P = .45). SHAPE could differentiate between mild (stage 0-1) and moderate to severe (stage 2-4) fibrosis (-10.4 ± 4.9 dB versus -5.4 ± 3.2 dB; P = .035), HVPG could not (3.0 ± 0.6 mmHg versus 4.8 ± 0.7 mmHg; P = .30). ROC curves showed a diagnostic accuracy for SHAPE of 80%, while HVPG reached 76%. CONCLUSION: Liver fibrosis staging in dialysis patients evaluated for portal hypertension appears to be more accurately predicted by SHAPE than by HVPG; albeit in a small sample size.
Authors: Roberto J Groszmann; Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao; Jaime Bosch; Norman D Grace; Andrew K Burroughs; Ramon Planas; Angels Escorsell; Juan Carlos Garcia-Pagan; David Patch; Daniel S Matloff; Hong Gao; Robert Makuch Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-11-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ethan J Halpern; Peter A McCue; Anne K Aksnes; Else K Hagen; Ferdinand Frauscher; Leonard G Gomella Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Valgerdur G Halldorsdottir; Jaydev K Dave; Andrew Marshall; Anya I Forsberg; Traci B Fox; John R Eisenbrey; Priscilla Machado; Ji-Bin Liu; Daniel A Merton; Flemming Forsberg Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2017-04-19 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Maria-Carlota Londoño; Andrés Cárdenas; Mónica Guevara; Llorenç Quintó; Dara de Las Heras; Miguel Navasa; Antoni Rimola; Juan-Carlos Garcia-Valdecasas; Vicente Arroyo; Pere Ginès Journal: Gut Date: 2007-04-23 Impact factor: 23.059