Observational studyPloS one2022
Clinical characteristics and predictors of esophagogastric variceal bleeding among patients with HCV-induced liver cirrhosis: An observational comparative study.
Observational study in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [A dual-center study of enhanced CT-based nomograms predicts spontaneous portosystemic shunts on initial hemorrhage from rupture of esophageal gastric varices in cirrhosis].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2026Article
- Establishment and validation of a nomogram for predicting esophagogastric variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- The Impact of Heart Rate Reduction From Individual Baseline With Propranolol for Primary and Secondary Prophylaxis of Variceal Hemorrhage in Cirrhosis.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Development of a nomogram model based on spleen volume change to predict high-risk esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Computed tomography-based multi-organ radiomics nomogram model for predicting the risk of esophagogastric variceal bleeding in cirrhosis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio as potential diagnostic markers for rebleeding in patients with esophagogastric variceal bleeding.Open life sciences · 2024Article
- Analysis of Complications and Risk Factors Other than Bleeding before and after Endoscopic Treatment of Esophagogastric Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the clinical characteristics, risk factors, and predictors of esophagogastric variceal bleeding in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-induced liver cirrhosis.
methodsThis comparative observational study was carried out on 100 patients suffering from post hepatitis cirrhosis and portal hypertension who were admitted to the Internal Medicine Department, Al-Azhar University Hospital, Damietta Egypt. Patients were classified into two groups: 50 of them presented with esophagogastric varices with acute variceal bleeding, and 50 patients presented without bleeding. Data were collected, coded, revised, and entered into the Stata software version 16.
resultsThe mean age of patients with bleeding was slightly higher than those without bleeding (55.58 ± 5.89 vs. 52.54 ± 9.01 years), p = 0.049. Mild ascites, positive H.Pylori, and Child-Pugh score B and C were an independent predictors of esophagogastric variceal bleeding (OR = 0.036, 95% CI: 0.0004-0.36; p = 0.005), (OR = 7.36, 95% CI: 1.44-37.59; p = 0.016), (OR = 19.0, 95% CI: 2.02-186.3; p = 0.010), and (OR = 40.51, 95% CI: 2.18-751.31; p = 0.013). The sensitivity of this model was 93.88%, specificity was 53.85%, PPV was 88.46%, NPV was 70.0%, correctly classified patients were 85.48%, and AUC was 90.27%. In the second model, pepsinogen level higher than 43.5 μg/l, AST (>54.5), Bilirubin (>1.45), and Hemoglobin (>11.5) were a significant independent predictors of esophagogastric variceal bleeding (OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.09-1.27; p<0.001), (OR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.03-1.27; p = 0.007), (OR = 5.55, 95% CI: 1.21-25.43; p = 0.027), and (OR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.008-0.32; p = 0.002), respectively. The sensitivity of this model was 92%, specificity was 98%, PPV was 97.87%, NPV was 92.45%, correctly classified patients were 95%, and AUC was 98.68%.
conclusionThe independent predictors of esophagogastric variceal bleeding were ascites, positive H. pylori, Child-Pugh score B and C, pepsinogen level higher than 43.5 μg/l, AST (>54.5), bilirubin (>1.45), and hemoglobin (>11.5). Laboratory investigations are more reliable in predicting variceal bleeding and excluding non-variceal bleeding; however, clinical symptoms should not be neglected, especially H. pylori infection, ascites, and Child-Pugh score.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.