ArticleJHEP reports : innovation in hepatology2025
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portosystemic pressure gradient measurement
Article in JHEP reports : innovation in hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Portosystemic Pressure Gradient Measurements vs. Transjugular Balloon Occlusion Measurement: A Multicenter EU Study
Inferior Vena Cava Pressure as Alternative to Hepatic Venous Pressure for EUS-guided Portal Pressure Gradient Measurement
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient Underestimate Direct Portal Pressure Gradient? A Focused Meta-Analysis.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2026Article
- A noninvasive model for predicting intrahepatic venovenous shunts before HVPG measurement: a multiple cohort study.Hepatology international · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in the Diagnosis and Management of Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension in Liver Cirrhosis: A Clinical Review.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Same Session Validation of a Custom-Built 22G With the Commercial 25G System for EUS-Guided Portal Pressure Gradient Measurement.United European gastroenterology journal · 2026Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound versus direct transjugular portal pressure gradient in patients receiving TIPS: influence of portal vein thrombosis.Gastroenterology report · 2026Article
- Endohepatology: Evolving Indications, Challenges, Unmet Needs and Opportunities.Gastro hep advances · 2026Review
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Management of Liver Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound in the management of complications related to cirrhosis- recent evidence.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & Aims: Patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension are at increased risk of hepatic decompensation and liver-related mortality. While the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is the accepted method for quantifying portal hypertension, its measurement and limited availability pose challenges. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient (EUS-PPG) provides a direct alternative. The ENCOUNTER study is the first to compare EUS-PPG to HVPG in the same patient, simultaneously. Methods: This prospective, international, bicentric study included patients referred for HVPG or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement at the University Hospital of Leuven (Belgium) and Hospital Clinic Barcelona (Spain). Patients underwent standard-of-care HVPG, followed by simultaneous HVPG and EUS-PPG measurements under propofol general anesthesia. Results: The final analysis included 21 patients with cirrhosis undergoing simultaneous HVPG and EUS-PPG measurements, of whom 15 received TIPS. Mean HVPG and EUS-PPG values under general anesthesia were comparable (11.9 ± 5.2 Conclusion: EUS-PPG is a reliable and safe alternative to HVPG for the direct measurement of portal pressure. However, attention must be paid to technical challenges, including the potential overestimation of EUS-guided hepatic vein pressures and the impact of general anesthesia, which may alter pressure measurements and subsequently affect risk classification. Impact and implications: The ENCOUNTER study is the first study to directly compare endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient (EUS-PPG) with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in the same patients, simultaneously. EUS-PPG is a safe and reliable direct alternative to HVPG for measuring portal pressure. However, technical challenges, including the potential overestimation of EUS-guided hepatic vein pressures and the impact of general anesthesia must be considered. EUS-PPG is particularly attractive for patients with chronic liver disease who have conflicting non-invasive test results, require additional endoscopic procedures, or in cases where HVPG may underestimate true portal pressure. ClinicalTrialsgov: NCT04987034.
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.