ArticleClinical imaging2024
Screening for exclusion of high-risk bleeding features of esophageal varices in cirrhosis through CT and MRI.
Article in Clinical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive approach to esophageal variceal bleeding: From prevention to treatment.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence-Based Systems in the Management of Esophageal Varices.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Extracellular vesicles in hepatocellular carcinoma: unraveling immunological mechanisms for enhanced diagnosis and overcoming drug resistance.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
aimEsophageal varices (EV) screening guidelines have evolved with improved risk stratification to avoid unnecessary esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in individuals with low bleeding risks. However, uncertainties persist in the recommendations for certain patient groups, particularly those with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and/or receiving non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) without prior endoscopy. This study assessed the efficacy of imaging in ruling out EVs and their high-risk features associated with bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and with HCC. We also evaluated the impact of NSBB on the detection of these characteristics.
methodsA total of 119 patients undergoing EGD with CT and/or MRI within 90 days of the procedure were included. 87 patients had HCC. A new imaging grading system was developed utilizing the size of EVs and the extent of their protrusion into the esophagus lumen. The negative predictive value (NPV) of EVimaging(-) versus EVimaging (+) (grades 1-3) in ruling out the presence of EV and/or high-risk features by EGD was calculated. The predictive performance of imaging was determined by logistic regression.
resultsThe NPV of imaging for detecting EV and high-risk features was 81 % and 92 %, respectively. Among HCC patients, the NPV for EV and high-risk features was 80 % and 64 %, respectively. Being on NSBB didn't statistically impact the imaging detection of EV. Imaging was a better predictor of high-risk EGD findings than Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores.
conclusionsOur results suggest that imaging can effectively rule out the presence of EV and high-risk features during EGD, even in patients with HCC and/or receiving NSBB.
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.