Abstract

BackgroundSeveral tests have been developed to screen varices needing treatment (VNT) in different screening settings. We aimed to develop simple estimators to quantify VNT risk and spare endoscopy while missing <5% of VNT, adapted to different screenings in the main etiologies. Methods2,368 patients with chronic liver disease were included. The main VNT predictors were platelets, prothrombin index (PI) and LSM. Their interactions led to score construction, LIP: (LSM*45)/(PI*platelets), and BLIP: BMI-adjusted LIP in NAFLD. Scores were categorized either for population (VNT sensitivity ≥95%) or individual (negative predictive value ≥95%) VNT screening. Results1) Scores diagnosing VNT. AUROCs were, PLER: 0.767 Anticipate: 0.773 (p=0.059 vs previous), LIP: 0.779 (p=0.136), PLEASE: 0.789 (p=0.196). 2) Population screening performance was in increasing order (with missed VNT rate), Baveno6 criteria: 23.9% (2.5%), Anticipate: 24.5%, p=0.367 vs previous (3.3%), PLER: 27.3%, p<0.001 (3.6%), LIP: 33.4%, p<0.001 (4.2%), PLEASE: 35.2%, p=0.006 (3.6%). In NAFLD, LIP: 38.6%, BLIP: 40.8%, p=0.038. 3) Individual screening performance was, expanded Baveno6 criteria: 42.7%, LIP: 54.1%, p<0.001. In NAFLD, performance was, NAFLD-cirrhosis criteria: 66.7%, BLIP: 74.6%, p<0.001. ConclusionLIP combined simplicity, performance and safety in each etiology. In NAFLD, BMI-adjusted LIP outperformed other tests.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.