Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Digestive Diseases and Sciences
Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences 7/2022

17-07-2021 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Original Article

Network Meta-Analysis: Noninvasive Imaging Modalities for Identifying Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension

Authors: Yang Hai, Weelic Chong, John R. Eisenbrey, Flemming Forsberg

Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Issue 7/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Although measurement of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is the current reference standard for obtaining portal venous pressures, several noninvasive imaging-based modalities have been proposed as alternatives.

Aims

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive imaging approaches for identifying clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH).

Methods

Two independent reviewers conducted a literature search of PubMed, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Library from inception until January 5, 2021. The following imaging modalities were compared to HVPG: computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance elastography, ultrasound, transient elastography (TE), shear wave elastography (SWE), acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) imaging, contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), and subharmonic-aided pressure estimation (SHAPE). Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) for summary receiver operating characteristic were calculated using both frequentist random effects and Bayesian network meta-analytic approaches.

Results

We analyzed 45 studies of 5678 patients. A broad overlapping confidence interval (CI) of DOR was observed among different imaging modalities: ARFI (30.5; 95% CI 12.7–73.3), CEUS and SHAPE (21.1; 95% CI 6.4–69.8), TE of liver stiffness (21.1; 95% CI 13.3–33.5), CT and MRI (13.7; 95% CI 7.40–25.4), SWE of liver stiffness (10.5; 95% CI 5.2–21.1), and ultrasound (9.5; 95% CI 4.9–18.4). The AUC of all imaging methods exceeded 0.8, indicating very good performance. At a cutoff of 80% specificity, TE, CEUS, and SHAPE exceeded 80% sensitivity.

Conclusion

Overall, noninvasive imaging modalities perform well for identifying CSPH. Clinicians should consider these noninvasive and cost-efficient tests when diagnosing CSPH.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Bosch J, Abraldes JG, Berzigotti A et al. The clinical use of HVPG measurements in chronic liver disease. Nature reviews Gastroenterology & hepatology 2009;6:573.
2.
Cichoż-lach H, Celiński K, Słomka M et al. Pathophysiology of portal hypertension. Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology 2008;59:231–238.PubMed
3.
Ravaioli F, Montagnani M, Lisotti A, Festi D et al. Noninvasive assessment of portal hypertension in advanced chronic liver disease: an update. Gastroenterology Research and Practice 2018;2018:1–11.
4.
Berzigotti A, Seijo S, Reverter E, Bosch J et al. Assessing portal hypertension in liver diseases. Expert Review of Gastroenterology & Hepatology 2013;7:141–155.
5.
Tey TT, Gogna A, Irani FG, Too CW et al. Application of a standardised protocol for hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement improves quality of readings and facilitates reduction of variceal bleeding in cirrhotics. Singapore Medical Journal 2016;57:132.PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Bolognesi M, Di Pascoli M, Sacerdoti D. Clinical role of non-invasive assessment of portal hypertension. World J Gastroenterol 2017;23:1–10.PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Berzigotti A. Non-invasive evaluation of portal hypertension using ultrasound elastography. J Hepatol 2017;67:399–411.PubMed
8.
Elmahdy AM, Berzigotti A. Non-invasive measurement of portal pressure. Current Hepatology Reports 2019;18:20–27.
9.
Kim G, Cho YZ, Baik SK, Kim MY et al. The accuracy of ultrasonography for the evaluation of portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis: a systematic review. Korean J Radiol 2015;16:314–324.PubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Procopet B, Berzigotti A. Diagnosis of cirrhosis and portal hypertension: imaging, non-invasive markers of fibrosis and liver biopsy. Gastroenterology Report 2017;5:79–89.PubMedPubMedCentral
11.
Baik SK. Haemodynamic evaluation by Doppler ultrasonography in patients with portal hypertension: a review. Liver International 2010;30:1403–1413.PubMed
12.
Shiina T, Nightingale KR, Palmeri ML, Hall TJ et al. WFUMB guidelines and recommendations for clinical use of ultrasound elastography: Part 1: basic principles and terminology. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2015;41:1126–1147.
13.
Jeon SK, Lee JM, Joo I, Yoon JH et al. Two-dimensional shear wave elastography with propagation maps for the assessment of liver fibrosis and clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with chronic liver disease: a prospective study. Academic Radiology 2020;27:798–806.PubMed
14.
Rifai K, Cornberg J, Mederacke I, Bahr MJ et al. Clinical feasibility of liver elastography by acoustic radiation force impulse imaging (ARFI). Digestive and Liver Disease 2011;43:491–497.PubMed
15.
Lucchina N, Recaldini C, Macchi M, Molinelli V et al. Point shear wave elastography of the spleen: its role in patients with portal hypertension. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 2018;44:771–778.
16.
Shi WT, Forsberg F, Raichlen JS et al. Pressure dependence of subharmonic signals from contrast microbubbles. Ultrasound Med Biol 1999;25:275–283.PubMed
17.
Lyshchik A. Specialty Imaging: Fundamentals of CEUS. Ansterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier; 2019.
18.
Kim MY, Suk KT, Baik SK, Kim HA et al. Hepatic vein arrival time as assessed by contrast-enhanced ultrasonography is useful for the assessment of portal hypertension in compensated cirrhosis. Hepatology 2012;56:1053–1062.PubMed
19.
Eisenbrey JR, Dave JK, Halldorsdottir VG, Merton DA et al. Chronic liver disease: noninvasive subharmonic aided pressure estimation of hepatic venous pressure gradient. Radiology 2013;268:581–588.PubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Gupta I, Eisenbrey JR, Machado P, Stanczak M et al. Diagnosing portal hypertension with noninvasive subharmonic pressure estimates from a US Contrast Agent. Radiology 2021;298:104–111.PubMed
21.
22.
Yu NC, Margolis D, Hsu M et al. Detection and grading of esophageal varices on liver CT: comparison of standard and thin-section multiplanar reconstructions in diagnostic accuracy. American Journal of Roentgenology 2011;197:643–649.PubMed
23.
Yzet T, Bouzerar R, Allart JD, Demuynck F et al. Hepatic vascular flow measurements by phase contrast MRI and doppler echography: a comparative and reproducibility study. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging: An Official Journal of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine 2010;31:579–588.
24.
Huwart L, Sempoux C, Vicaut E, Salameh N et al. Magnetic resonance elastography for the noninvasive staging of liver fibrosis. Gastroenterology 2008;135:32–40.PubMed
25.
Nedredal GI, Yin M, McKenzie T, Lillegard J et al. Portal hypertension correlates with splenic stiffness as measured with MR elastography. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2011;34:79–87.PubMed
26.
McInnes MD, Moher D, Thombs BD, McGrath TA et al. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. Jama 2018;319:388–396.PubMed
27.
Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Annals of Internal Medicine 2011;155:529–536.PubMed
28.
Ma X, Lian Q, Chu H, Ibrahim JG, Chen Y et al. A Bayesian hierarchical model for network meta-analysis of multiple diagnostic tests. Biostatistics 2018;19:87–102.PubMed
29.
Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ et al. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:982–990.PubMed
30.
R Core Team R. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. In: R foundation for statistical computing Vienna, Austria; 2013.
31.
Doebler P, Holling H. Meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy with mada. R Packag 2015;1:15.
32.
Macaskill P, Gatsonis C, Deeks J et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Version 09 0 London: The Cochrane Collaboration 2010.
33.
Baik SK, Kim JW, Kim HS, Kwon SO et al. Recent variceal bleeding: doppler US hepatic vein waveform in assessment of severity of portal hypertension and vasoactive drug response. Radiology 2006;240:574–580.PubMed
34.
Kim MY, Baik SK, Park DH, Lim DW et al. Damping index of Doppler hepatic vein waveform to assess the severity of portal hypertension and response to propranolol in liver cirrhosis: a prospective nonrandomized study. Liver Int 2007;27:1103–1110.PubMed
35.
Kim SY, Jeong WK, Kim Y, Heo JN et al. Changing waveform during respiration on hepatic vein Doppler sonography of severe portal hypertension: comparison with the damping index. J Ultrasound Med 2011;30:455–462.PubMed
36.
Schneider AW, Kalk JF, Klein CP. Hepatic arterial pulsatility index in cirrhosis: correlation with portal pressure. J Hepatol 1999;30:876–881.PubMed
37.
Tasu JP, Rocher L, PEletier G, Kuoch V et al. Hepatic venous pressure gradients measured by duplex ultrasound. Clin Radiol 2002;57:746–752.PubMed
38.
Berzigotti A, Casadei A, Magalotti D, Castaldini N et al. Renovascular impedance correlates with portal pressure in patients with liver cirrhosis. Radiology 2006;240:581–586.PubMed
39.
Berzigotti A, Rossi V, Tiani C, Pierpaoli L et al. Prognostic value of a single HVPG measurement and Doppler-ultrasound evaluation in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. J Gastroenterol 2011;46:687–695.PubMed
40.
Berzigotti A, Seijo S, Arena U, Abraldes JG et al. Elastography, spleen size, and platelet count identify portal hypertension in patients with compensated cirrhosis. Gastroenterology 2013;144:102-111.e101.PubMed
41.
Lee CM, Jeong WK, Lim S, Kim Y et al. Diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis: splenic arterial resistive index versus liver stiffness measurement. Ultrasound Med Biol 2016;42:1312–1320.PubMed
42.
Shimada T, Maruyama H, Kondo T, Sekimoto T et al. Impact of splenic circulation: non-invasive microbubble-based assessment of portal hemodynamics. Eur Radiol 2015;25:812–820.PubMed
43.
Augustin S, Millán L, González A, Martell M et al. Detection of early portal hypertension with routine data and liver stiffness in patients with asymptomatic liver disease: a prospective study. J Hepatol 2014;60:561–569.PubMed
44.
Bureau C, Metivier S, Peron JM, Selves J et al. Transient elastography accurately predicts presence of significant portal hypertension in patients with chronic liver disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008;27:1261–1268.PubMed
45.
Hong WK, Kim MY, Baik SK, Shin SY et al. The usefulness of non-invasive liver stiffness measurements in predicting clinically significant portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients: Korean data. Clin Mol Hepatol 2013;19:370–375.PubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Kitson MT, Roberts SK, Colman JC, Paul E et al. Liver stiffness and the prediction of clinically significant portal hypertension and portal hypertensive complications. Scand J Gastroenterol 2015;50:462–469.PubMed
47.
Kumar A, Khan NM, Anikhindi SA, Sharma P et al. Correlation of transient elastography with hepatic venous pressure gradient in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension: A study of 326 patients from India. World J Gastroenterol 2017;23:687–696.PubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Lemoine M, Katsahian S, Ziol M, Nahon P et al. Liver stiffness measurement as a predictive tool of clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with compensated hepatitis C virus or alcohol-related cirrhosis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2008;28:1102–1110.PubMed
49.
Llop E, Berzigotti A, Reig M, Erice E et al. Assessment of portal hypertension by transient elastography in patients with compensated cirrhosis and potentially resectable liver tumors. J Hepatol 2012;56:103–108.PubMed
50.
Reiberger T, Ferlitsch A, Payer BA, Pinter M et al. Noninvasive screening for liver fibrosis and portal hypertension by transient elastography–a large single center experience. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2012;124:395–402.PubMed
51.
Sánchez-Conde M, Miralles P, Bellón JM, Rincón D et al. Use of transient elastography (FibroScan®) for the noninvasive assessment of portal hypertension in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients. J Viral Hepat 2011;18:685–691.PubMed
52.
Schwabl P, Bota S, Salzl P, Mandorfer M et al. New reliability criteria for transient elastography increase the number of accurate measurements for screening of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Liver Int 2015;35:381–390.PubMed
53.
Zykus R, Jonaitis L, Petrenkienė V, Pranculis A, Kupčinskas L. Liver and spleen transient elastography predicts portal hypertension in patients with chronic liver disease: a prospective cohort study. BMC Gastroenterol 2015;15:183.PubMedPubMedCentral
54.
Burak Özkan M, Bilgici MC, Eren E, Caltepe G. Diagnostic accuracy of point shear wave elastography in the detection of portal hypertension in pediatric patients. Diagn Interv Imaging 2018;99:151–156.PubMed
55.
Elkrief L, Ronot M, Andrade F, Dioguardi Burgio M et al. Non-invasive evaluation of portal hypertension using shear-wave elastography: analysis of two algorithms combining liver and spleen stiffness in 191 patients with cirrhosis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2018;47:621–630.PubMed
56.
Jansen C, Bogs C, Verlinden W, Thiele M et al. Shear-wave elastography of the liver and spleen identifies clinically significant portal hypertension: a prospective multicentre study. Liver Int 2017;37:396–405.PubMed
57.
Kim TY, Jeong WK, Sohn JH, Kim J et al. Evaluation of portal hypertension by real-time shear wave elastography in cirrhotic patients. Liver Int 2015;35:2416–2424.PubMed
58.
Maruyama H, Kobayashi K, Kiyono S, Sekimoto T et al. Two-dimensional shear wave elastography with propagation-based reliability assessment for grading hepatic fibrosis and portal hypertension. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2016;23:595–602.PubMed
59.
Procopet B, Berzigotti A, Abraldes JG, Turon F et al. Real-time shear-wave elastography: applicability, reliability and accuracy for clinically significant portal hypertension. J Hepatol 2015;62:1068–1075.PubMed
60.
Stefanescu H, Rusu C, Lupsor-Platon M, Nicoara Farcau O et al. Liver stiffness assessed by ultrasound shear wave elastography from general electric accurately predicts clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with advanced chronic liver disease. Ultraschall Med 2019;41:526–533.PubMed
61.
Zhu YL, Ding H, Fu TT, Peng SY et al. Portal hypertension in hepatitis B-related cirrhosis: diagnostic accuracy of liver and spleen stiffness by 2-D shear-wave elastography. Hepatol Res 2019;49:540–549.PubMed
62.
Yoon HM, Kim SY, Kim KM, Oh SH et al. Liver stiffness measured by shear-wave elastography for evaluating intrahepatic portal hypertension in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2017;64:892–897.PubMed
63.
Attia D, Schoenemeier B, Rodt T, Negm AA et al. Evaluation of liver and spleen stiffness with acoustic radiation force impulse quantification elastography for diagnosing clinically significant portal hypertension. Ultraschall Med 2015;36:603–610.PubMed
64.
Salzl P, Reiberger T, Ferlitsch M, Payer BA et al. Evaluation of portal hypertension and varices by acoustic radiation force impulse imaging of the liver compared to transient elastography and AST to platelet ratio index. Ultraschall Med 2014;35:528–533.PubMed
65.
Takuma Y, Nouso K, Morimoto Y, Tomokuni J et al. Portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis: diagnostic accuracy of spleen stiffness. Radiology 2016;279:609–619.PubMed
66.
Kihira S, Kagen AC, Vasudevan P, Jajamovich GH et al. Non-invasive prediction of portal pressures using CT and MRI in chronic liver disease. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2016;41:42–49.
67.
Levick C, Phillips-Hughes J, Collier J, Banerjee R et al. Non-invasive assessment of portal hypertension by multi-parametric magnetic resonance imaging of the spleen: a proof of concept study. PLoS One 2019;14:e0221066.PubMedPubMedCentral
68.
Liu F, Ning Z, Liu Y, Liu D et al. Development and validation of a radiomics signature for clinically significant portal hypertension in cirrhosis (CHESS1701): a prospective multicenter study. EBioMedicine 2018;36:151–158.PubMedPubMedCentral
69.
Ronot M, Lambert S, Elkrief L, Doblas S et al. Assessment of portal hypertension and high-risk oesophageal varices with liver and spleen three-dimensional multifrequency MR elastography in liver cirrhosis. Eur Radiol 2014;24:1394–1402.PubMed
70.
Sartoris R, Rautou PE, Elkrief L, Pollorsi G et al. Quantification of liver surface nodularity at CT: utility for detection of portal hypertension. Radiology 2018;289:698–707.PubMed
71.
Tseng Y, Ma L, Luo T, Zeng X et al. Non-invasive predictive model for hepatic venous pressure gradient based on a 3-dimensional computed tomography volume rendering technology. Exp Ther Med 2018;15:3329–3335.PubMedPubMedCentral
72.
Colecchia A, Montrone L, Scaioli E, Bacchi-Reggiani ML et al. Measurement of spleen stiffness to evaluate portal hypertension and the presence of esophageal varices in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis. Gastroenterology 2012;143:646–654.PubMed
73.
Vizzutti F, Arena U, Romanelli RG, Rega L et al. Liver stiffness measurement predicts severe portal hypertension in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis. Hepatology 2007;45:1290–1297.PubMed
74.
Salzl P, Reiberger T, Ferlitsch M, Payer B et al. Evaluation of portal hypertension and varices by acoustic radiation force impulse imaging of the liver compared to transient elastography and AST to platelet ratio index. Ultraschall in der Medizin-European Journal of Ultrasound 2014;35:528–533.
Metadata
Title
Network Meta-Analysis: Noninvasive Imaging Modalities for Identifying Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension
Authors
Yang Hai
Weelic Chong
John R. Eisenbrey
Flemming Forsberg
Publication date
17-07-2021
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Issue 7/2022
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-021-07168-y

Other articles of this Issue 7/2022

Digestive Diseases and Sciences 7/2022 Go to the issue

Correspondence

Impact of Virtual Interviews on Gastroenterology and Hepatology Fellowship Recruitment

Original Article

Metabolic Risk Profiles for Hepatic Steatosis Differ by Race/Ethnicity: An Elastography-Based Study of US Adults

Original Article

Pilot Study of a Self-Administered Hypnosis Intervention for Functional Dyspepsia

Original Article

Bariatric Bypass Surgery Is a Risk Factor for Incomplete Colonoscopy Preparation

Original Article

Perforations from Endoscopic Dilation of Corrosive Strictures in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Original Article

Repeat Cold Snare Polypectomy Can Be Performed for Recurrent Benign Lesions After Cold Snare Polypectomy

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Heart Failure Video

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch now

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discuss last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits