Copyright
©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Dec 16, 2023; 15(12): 681-689
Published online Dec 16, 2023. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v15.i12.681
Published online Dec 16, 2023. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v15.i12.681
Ref. | Inclusion criteria | Exclusion criteria | Study aim | Results |
Somsouk et al[28], 2014 | Cirrhotic patients with EVB who underwent CT prior to EVB (case group); cirrhotic patients without EVB who underwent CT and EGD within 45 d (control group) | Previous EVB, EVL, or OLT | To identify CT features associated with EVB | Features associated with EVB: EV diameter: 5.8 mm case group vs. 2.7 mm control group (P < 0.001); Maximal EV diameter ≥ 5 mm: 63% case group vs. 7.5% control group (P < 0.001); Maximal EV diameter < 3 mm: 7.4% case group vs. 54.7% control group (P = 0.001); LGV diameter: 2.3 mm case group vs. 1.6 mm control group (P = 0.001); PUV diameter: 1.9 mm case group vs. 1.1 mm control group (P < 0.001); Ascites: 74% case group vs. 25% control group (P < 0.001) |
Ge et al[29], 2015 | HBV-related cirrhotic patients who underwent CT | HCC, PVT, and non HBV-related cirrhosis | To identify CT features associated with EVB | Features associated with EVB: IMV diameter (P = 0.0528); PGV diameter (P = 0.0283); EV score (P = 0.0221) |
Calame et al[30], 2017 | Cirrhotic patients who underwent CT and EGD within 6 mo | BB, TIPS, EVL, PVT, liver resection/loco-regional treatment, and esophageal cancer | To evaluate the association between the presence/size of PUV on CT and first EVB | Features associated with first EVB: Small/absent PUV (P < 0.001); Spleen size >135 mm (P < 0.001); Ascites (P = 0.001) |
Kim et al[31], 2019 | Cirrhotic patients receiving propranolol for the primary prophylaxis of EVB who underwent CT | Duration of propranolol prophylaxis < 6 mo, previous EVB and/or EVL before propranolol therapy, and lack of contrast-enhanced liver CT data within 6 mo before or after first propranolol dosage | To evaluate liver volume for the prediction of EVB during primary prophylaxis | Association of liver volume index with EVB (P = 0.044) |
Salahshour et al[32], 2020 | Cirrhotic patients who underwent EGD and CT within 6 mo | Liver resection/loco-regional treatment, and esophageal cancer | To identify CT features associated with EVB | Features associated with EVB: EV presence (P = 0.002); Short gastric collateral presence/size (P < 0.001/P < 0.001); Coronary collateral presence (P = 0.02); Paraesophageal collateral presence/size (P = 0.01/P = 0.03); Paraesophageal draining collateral presence/size (P = 0.02/P = 0.02); LGV size (P = 0.03); Gastric fundus varices size (P = 0.001); IMV size (P = 0.04); Ascites (P = 0.04) |
Xie et al[33], 2020 | Cirrhotic patients with EV who underwent EGD and CT, and were followed-up for 6 mo | Cardiovascular disease, hematologic disease, renal insufficiency, or malignancy; previous shunt, devascularization,EIS, or EVL; use of vasopressin, somatostatin or propranolol within 1 wk before hospitalization; NVUGIB | To evaluate sensitivity and specificity of EV diameter, EV cross-sectional number, and EV total area in the prediction of first EVB | EV diameter: Sensitivity 0.8; specificity 0.52; AUC 0.72; critical point 5.55 mm; EV cross-sectional number: sensitivity 0.73; specificity 0.6; AUC 0.68; critical point 4; EV total cross-sectional area: sensitivity 0.75; specificity 0.73; AUC 0.82; critical point 1.03 cm2 |
Peisen et al[34], 2021 | Cirrhotic patients who underwent PCT and EGD within 3 mo | Diffusely infiltrating HCC, TIPS, and PVT | To evaluate the correlation between PCT-derived variables (HPI, PVP and SBF) and EVB | Weak correlation of HPI, PVP, and SBF with EBV (Eta correlation coefficient 0.126, 0.031, and 0.119, respectively) |
Wan et al[35], 2021 | Cirrhotic patients with EV who underwent EGD and CT within 4 wk | Prior EV treatment (e.g. BB, EVL); PVT; HCC; splenectomy, hepatectomy or portal-azygous disconnection | To identify CT-derived quantitative parameters of liver lobe associated with first EVB | Features associated with first EVB: CV (P = 0.012); CFV (P = 0.03); CV/TV (P < 0.001); CFV/TFV (P < 0.001) |
Wan et al[36], 2022 | Cirrhotic patients with EV who underwent contrast-enhanced CT within 4 wk of EGD | Prior EV treatment (e.g., BB, EVL); PVT; HCC; splenectomy, hepatectomy or portal-azygous disconnection | To identify CT quantitative parameters associated with EVB | No significant difference in EV grade, EV diameter, CSA, EV volume, SNV, LGV diameter, PV, SV, and the opening type of LGV between bleeding and non-bleeding groups |
- Citation: Martino A, Amitrano L, Guardascione M, Di Serafino M, Bennato R, Martino R, de Leone A, Orsini L, Romano L, Lombardi G. The role of computed tomography for the prediction of esophageal variceal bleeding: Current status and future perspectives. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 15(12): 681-689
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5190/full/v15/i12/681.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v15.i12.681