Role of hepatic hemodynamic study in the evaluation of patients with cirrhosis

[Guest guest]

Hepatogastroenterology. 2003 Nov-Dec;50(54):2052-6.

Role of hepatic hemodynamic study in the evaluation of patients with

cirrhosis.

Dittrich S, de Mattos AA, Becker M, Goncaves DM, Cheinquer H.

Gastroenterology and Hepatology Service of the Irmandade da Santa Casa de

Misericordia of Porto Alegre, Fundacao Faculdade Federal de Ciencias Medicas

of Porto Alegre Medical School, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Brazil.

sirleid@...

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the levels of hepatic venous pressure gradient

(HVPG) in a population of cirrhotic patients, checking if the 12 mmHg level

discriminates those who bleed by rupture of gastroesophageal varices and

assessing the prognostic role of hepatic venous pressure gradient in the

progress of these patients. METHODOLOGY: Eighty-three cirrhotic patients

(mean age 52.9 +/- 10.1 years) were studied, 71.1% of whom were males. All

patients performed a hepatic hemodynamic study to determine the hepatic

venous pressure gradient. Patients were followed 16.6 +/- 16.02 months on

average. RESULTS: Mean hepatic venous pressure gradient was 15.26 +/- 6.46

mmHg. The risk of bleeding was 50% for patients with hepatic venous pressure

gradient below 12 mmHg and 76% (rr = 1.52, p = 0.045) for those with hepatic

venous pressure gradient above 12 mmHg. When patients were grouped according

to outcome (death, shunt surgery, transplantation, or rebleeding), the mean

hepatic venous pressure gradient (16.65 +/- 6.71) was found to be

significantly higher in these patients than in living patients without

rebleeding (12.75 +/- 4.96), p = 0.014. However, the cutoff point of 16 mmHg

failed to discriminate those patients with a worse prognosis. CONCLUSIONS:

Hepatic venous pressure gradient determination can be used to identify those

individuals with a higher risk of bleeding due to rupture of

gastroesophageal varices, as well as those with a more reserved prognosis,

even though the discriminative critical levels used suggest that its

clinical usefulness is relative.

PMID: 14700005 [PubMed - in process

[Guest guest]

Hepatogastroenterology. 2003 Nov-Dec;50(54):2052-6.

Role of hepatic hemodynamic study in the evaluation of patients with

cirrhosis.

Dittrich S, de Mattos AA, Becker M, Goncaves DM, Cheinquer H.

Gastroenterology and Hepatology Service of the Irmandade da Santa Casa de

Misericordia of Porto Alegre, Fundacao Faculdade Federal de Ciencias Medicas

of Porto Alegre Medical School, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Brazil.

sirleid@...

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the levels of hepatic venous pressure gradient

(HVPG) in a population of cirrhotic patients, checking if the 12 mmHg level

discriminates those who bleed by rupture of gastroesophageal varices and

assessing the prognostic role of hepatic venous pressure gradient in the

progress of these patients. METHODOLOGY: Eighty-three cirrhotic patients

(mean age 52.9 +/- 10.1 years) were studied, 71.1% of whom were males. All

patients performed a hepatic hemodynamic study to determine the hepatic

venous pressure gradient. Patients were followed 16.6 +/- 16.02 months on

average. RESULTS: Mean hepatic venous pressure gradient was 15.26 +/- 6.46

mmHg. The risk of bleeding was 50% for patients with hepatic venous pressure

gradient below 12 mmHg and 76% (rr = 1.52, p = 0.045) for those with hepatic

venous pressure gradient above 12 mmHg. When patients were grouped according

to outcome (death, shunt surgery, transplantation, or rebleeding), the mean

hepatic venous pressure gradient (16.65 +/- 6.71) was found to be

significantly higher in these patients than in living patients without

rebleeding (12.75 +/- 4.96), p = 0.014. However, the cutoff point of 16 mmHg

failed to discriminate those patients with a worse prognosis. CONCLUSIONS:

Hepatic venous pressure gradient determination can be used to identify those

individuals with a higher risk of bleeding due to rupture of

gastroesophageal varices, as well as those with a more reserved prognosis,

even though the discriminative critical levels used suggest that its

clinical usefulness is relative.

PMID: 14700005 [PubMed - in process

[Guest guest]

Hepatogastroenterology. 2003 Nov-Dec;50(54):2052-6.

Role of hepatic hemodynamic study in the evaluation of patients with

cirrhosis.

Dittrich S, de Mattos AA, Becker M, Goncaves DM, Cheinquer H.

Gastroenterology and Hepatology Service of the Irmandade da Santa Casa de

Misericordia of Porto Alegre, Fundacao Faculdade Federal de Ciencias Medicas

of Porto Alegre Medical School, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Brazil.

sirleid@...

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the levels of hepatic venous pressure gradient

(HVPG) in a population of cirrhotic patients, checking if the 12 mmHg level

discriminates those who bleed by rupture of gastroesophageal varices and

assessing the prognostic role of hepatic venous pressure gradient in the

progress of these patients. METHODOLOGY: Eighty-three cirrhotic patients

(mean age 52.9 +/- 10.1 years) were studied, 71.1% of whom were males. All

patients performed a hepatic hemodynamic study to determine the hepatic

venous pressure gradient. Patients were followed 16.6 +/- 16.02 months on

average. RESULTS: Mean hepatic venous pressure gradient was 15.26 +/- 6.46

mmHg. The risk of bleeding was 50% for patients with hepatic venous pressure

gradient below 12 mmHg and 76% (rr = 1.52, p = 0.045) for those with hepatic

venous pressure gradient above 12 mmHg. When patients were grouped according

to outcome (death, shunt surgery, transplantation, or rebleeding), the mean

hepatic venous pressure gradient (16.65 +/- 6.71) was found to be

significantly higher in these patients than in living patients without

rebleeding (12.75 +/- 4.96), p = 0.014. However, the cutoff point of 16 mmHg

failed to discriminate those patients with a worse prognosis. CONCLUSIONS:

Hepatic venous pressure gradient determination can be used to identify those

individuals with a higher risk of bleeding due to rupture of

gastroesophageal varices, as well as those with a more reserved prognosis,

even though the discriminative critical levels used suggest that its

clinical usefulness is relative.

PMID: 14700005 [PubMed - in process

[Guest guest]

Hepatogastroenterology. 2003 Nov-Dec;50(54):2052-6.

Role of hepatic hemodynamic study in the evaluation of patients with

cirrhosis.

Dittrich S, de Mattos AA, Becker M, Goncaves DM, Cheinquer H.

Gastroenterology and Hepatology Service of the Irmandade da Santa Casa de

Misericordia of Porto Alegre, Fundacao Faculdade Federal de Ciencias Medicas

of Porto Alegre Medical School, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Brazil.

sirleid@...

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To evaluate the levels of hepatic venous pressure gradient

(HVPG) in a population of cirrhotic patients, checking if the 12 mmHg level

discriminates those who bleed by rupture of gastroesophageal varices and

assessing the prognostic role of hepatic venous pressure gradient in the

progress of these patients. METHODOLOGY: Eighty-three cirrhotic patients

(mean age 52.9 +/- 10.1 years) were studied, 71.1% of whom were males. All

patients performed a hepatic hemodynamic study to determine the hepatic

venous pressure gradient. Patients were followed 16.6 +/- 16.02 months on

average. RESULTS: Mean hepatic venous pressure gradient was 15.26 +/- 6.46

mmHg. The risk of bleeding was 50% for patients with hepatic venous pressure

gradient below 12 mmHg and 76% (rr = 1.52, p = 0.045) for those with hepatic

venous pressure gradient above 12 mmHg. When patients were grouped according

to outcome (death, shunt surgery, transplantation, or rebleeding), the mean

hepatic venous pressure gradient (16.65 +/- 6.71) was found to be

significantly higher in these patients than in living patients without

rebleeding (12.75 +/- 4.96), p = 0.014. However, the cutoff point of 16 mmHg

failed to discriminate those patients with a worse prognosis. CONCLUSIONS:

Hepatic venous pressure gradient determination can be used to identify those

individuals with a higher risk of bleeding due to rupture of

gastroesophageal varices, as well as those with a more reserved prognosis,

even though the discriminative critical levels used suggest that its

clinical usefulness is relative.

PMID: 14700005 [PubMed - in process