ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2026
Same Session Validation of a Custom-Built 22G With the Commercial 25G System for EUS-Guided Portal Pressure Gradient Measurement.
Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07703540 (Inferior Vena Cava Pressure as Alternative to Hepatic Venous Pressure for EUS-guided Portal Pressure Gradient Measurement), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Inferior Vena Cava Pressure as Alternative to Hepatic Venous Pressure for EUS-guided Portal Pressure Gradient Measurement
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Development of Endo-hepatology.DEN open · 2027Review
- 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
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 AND
aimsEndoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient (EUS-PPG) measurement is a promising alternative to hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) assessment, especially in settings where HVPG is unavailable or limited. The commercial 25-gauge (25G) system showed good correlation with the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). However, the 25G has drawbacks due to its small caliber and the proprietary pressure transducer. The aim of this study was to validate a custom-built 22G conventional intravascular pressure transducer system (22G EUS-PPG).
methodsIn this prospective cohort study, 26 patients underwent EUS-PPG measurement using both systems during the same session. The primary outcome was the correlation of PPG values. Secondary outcomes included the correlation and variability of portal vein pressure (PVP) and hepatic vein pressure (HVP) measured by both systems.
resultsPPG values showed excellent correlation of both systems (r = 0.901, p < 0.001). 25G EUS-PPG correctly identified clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH, defined as PPG ≥ 10mmHg) in 25 of 26 (96.2%) cases. Portal vein and hepatic vein pressures also correlated significantly (r = 0.776 and r = 0.673, respectively) between both systems. Variability within both systems was very low to low.
conclusionEUS-PPG measurements obtained using the commercial 25G and custom-built 22G EUS-PPG systems were validated. The custom-built 22G system excels due to pressure-tracing based quality control, availability and cost-efficiency.
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.