【摘要】" 基于瞬時彈性成像的肝臟硬度測定作為一項無創(chuàng)肝纖維化測定技術,目前在臨床上被廣泛應用。有研究證明,肝臟硬度測定可以準確預測慢性肝病患者臨床顯著性門靜脈高壓及高危靜脈曲張。近年來脾臟硬度測定作為一項新興的診斷技術,相比肝臟硬度其預測門靜脈高壓及相關并發(fā)癥的準確性更高。研究旨在介紹基于瞬時彈性成像肝臟硬度測定及脾臟硬度測定在慢性肝病患者中預測臨床顯著性門靜脈高壓及高危靜脈曲張的應用進展,從而幫助臨床醫(yī)師減少無意義的肝靜脈壓力梯度測定及內鏡等侵入性操作,進而更高效地評估肝硬化患者病情并改善預后。
【關鍵詞】" 肝硬化;門靜脈高壓;食管胃靜脈曲張;肝臟硬度測定;脾臟硬度測定
中圖分類號" R575.2" "文獻標識碼" A" " 文章編號" 1671-0223(2025)09--05
Research status on predicting clinically significant portal hypertension and high-risk varices based on transient elastography" Hu Han.Graduate School, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 310053, China
【Abstract】" Measurement of liver stiffness using transient elastography, as a non-invasive technique for assessing liver fibrosis, is now widely applied in clinical practice. Studies have shown that liver stiffness measurement can accurately predict clinically significant portal hypertension and high-risk esophageal varices in patients with chronic liver disease. In recent years, spleen stiffness measurement has emerged as a novel diagnostic technique, with some studies suggesting that, compared to liver stiffness, it offers higher accuracy in predicting portal hypertension and related complications. This article aims to introduce the advancements in the application of transient elastography-based liver stiffness and spleen stiffness measurements in predicting clinically significant portal hypertension and high-risk esophageal varices in patients with chronic liver disease, so as to help clinicians reduce invasive procedures such as futile hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement and endoscopy, and thus more efficiently evaluate the disease condition and improve the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis.
【Key words】" "Cirrhosis; Portal hypertension; Esophagogastric varices; Liver stiffness measurement; Spleen stiffness measurement
門靜脈高壓是肝硬化的主要結局,且往往引起嚴重的并發(fā)癥。而食管胃靜脈曲張及食管胃靜脈曲張出血是門靜脈高壓患者的主要并發(fā)癥和死亡原因[1]。目前高危靜脈曲張(high risk varices,HRV)被普遍定義為中、大靜脈曲張或小靜脈曲張伴有紅色征陽性[2],對于該類易出血的患者,內鏡下檢查及跟進治療尤為重要。然而內鏡下檢查雖可發(fā)現(xiàn)靜脈曲張的有無及嚴重程度,但無法定量評估門靜脈壓力。肝靜脈壓力梯度(hepatic venous pressure gradient,HVPG)是評價門靜脈高壓嚴重程度的金標準,可反映肝硬化進展程度,預測患者預后并指導下一步治療[3]。HVPG>5mmHg可診斷為門靜脈高壓,而HVPG≥10mmHg可診斷為臨床顯著性門靜脈高壓(clinically significant portal hypertension,CSPH)[2,4]。根據(jù)有無失代償事件(出血、腹水、肝性腦病等),肝硬化被分為代償期肝硬化和失代償肝硬化。而CSPH是代償期肝硬化發(fā)生失代償?shù)闹匾录?,也被認為是門靜脈高壓干預的重要節(jié)點。目前測量HVPG的手段存在有創(chuàng)、費用高、技術難度大的缺點,而內鏡也同樣受醫(yī)療資源有限及費用高等影響,導致患者相對接受度低。在過去幾年,瞬時彈性成像(transient elastography,TE)作為一種新型測量肝臟硬度的非侵入性技術得到了廣泛應用。雖然TE最初被提出用于評估肝纖維化,但肝臟硬度值與HVPG以及食管靜脈曲張之間存在良好的相關性,這表明TE可能是無創(chuàng)評估門靜脈高壓的有效工具[5]。近年來TE也被用來測量脾臟硬度,有研究表明其相對肝臟硬度預測CSPH及HRV的準確性更高[6]。因此,利用肝臟硬度測定(liver stiffness measurement,LSM)和脾臟硬度測定(spleen stiffness measurement,SSM)等相對方便及價廉的無創(chuàng)指標預測CSPH及有效識別HRV,進而減少無意義的內鏡檢查成為研究熱點,本文就該方面研究進展進行綜述。
1" 肝硬度預測CSPH及食管胃底靜脈曲張
1.1" 在Baveno Ⅵ標準前肝硬度預測門靜脈高壓及食管胃底靜脈曲張的相關應用
LSM主要通過TE技術來實現(xiàn),相對肝活檢等應用有創(chuàng)操作評估肝纖維化,其操作簡便,可重復進行,尤其是無創(chuàng)的特點大幅降低了并發(fā)癥的發(fā)生率,同時準確性較高。早在21世紀初,全球范圍就有大量基于TE技術利用超聲測量肝臟硬度定量評估肝纖維化的研究[7]。2006年,Kazemi等[8]率先提出肝硬度可用于預測代償期肝硬化患者有無食管靜脈曲張,受試者工作特征曲線下面積(AUC)為0.84。而不同隊列研究均驗證了肝硬度與HVPG的相關性,盡管肝硬度在不同隊列的臨界值不同,但均可預測不同病因慢性肝病中的CSPH,并具有良好的預測效能[9-11]。為了獲取更高的準確性,一項前瞻性研究[12]提出了肝硬度-脾臟直徑與血小板比值(LSPS)評分(LSPS=肝臟硬度×脾臟直徑/血小板),該評分不僅可無創(chuàng)預測肝纖維化,也可篩查高出血風險食管胃靜脈曲張。該研究指出LSPS<3.5時可因靜脈曲張出血風險低而避免胃鏡檢查,LSPS>5.5則可準確識別出高出血風險的食管胃靜脈曲張[13],而LSPS>6.5時可以有效預測食管胃底靜脈破裂出血[14]。Berzigotti等[15]利用肝臟硬度、脾臟直徑和血小板計數(shù)建立了有別于LSPS評分的無創(chuàng)新模型(靜脈曲張評分及門靜脈高壓評分),兩者和LSPS評分均可準確識別80%以上的食管胃底靜脈曲張和CSPH,并在驗證組中得到驗證。Augustin等[16]開展了一項關于門診無癥狀慢性肝病篩查門靜脈高壓的研究,提出LSM≥25kPa可排除CSPH,而LSM<13.6kPa可排除HRV從而避免內鏡檢查,而介于兩者之間的患者可通過血小板高低(是否>150×109/L)及腹部超聲結果(有無脾腫大及肝臟表面結節(jié))進一步明確是否需行內鏡檢查??傊?,在Baveno Ⅵ標準前,利用肝硬度及無創(chuàng)指標診斷預測CSPH及HRV暫未達成有效共識。
1.2" 在結合Baveno Ⅵ標準后肝硬度預測門靜脈高壓及食管胃底靜脈曲張的相關應用
聚焦門靜脈高壓相關的Baveno Ⅵ共識首次提出LSM<20kPa且血小板計數(shù)>150×109/L的患者可以安全排除HRV,從而避免內鏡篩查,即Baveno Ⅵ標準[2],并提出代償期進展性慢性肝?。╟ompensated advanced chronic liver disease,cACLD)的概念:LSM<10kPa可排除cACLD,LSM介于10~15kPa之間提示可能為cACLD,而LSM>15kPa則高度提示為cACLD。一項多中心回顧性研究也成功驗證了在cACLD患者中Baveno Ⅵ標準可有效識別出避免內鏡檢查的患者,準確率達98%,然而在該隊列中只有33%的患者符合該標準[17]。在Abraldes等[18]發(fā)起的“預期”研究中,針對cACLD患者,驗證了Baveno Ⅵ標準可以使30%的患者避免內鏡檢查,LSPS>2.65可識別其中80%的CSPH患者,而LSPS<1.33可使26%的患者避免內鏡檢查,HRV漏診率<5%。為擴大適用范圍,減少內鏡檢查,Augustin等[19]提出擴大Baveno Ⅵ標準:血小板計數(shù)>110×109/L且LSM<25 kPa可避免內鏡檢查,該標準可減少40%的內鏡檢查并在驗證隊列中得到驗證。在非酒精性脂肪性肝病相關的代償期肝硬化患者中,Baveno Ⅵ標準及擴大Baveno Ⅵ標準已被驗證可有效排除HRV,其漏診率均控制在5%以下,但研究發(fā)現(xiàn)肥胖患者因常規(guī)M探頭檢測效能受限,導致診斷準確性下降。基于此,研究者提出針對不同探頭的診斷標準:對于M探頭,血小板計數(shù)>110×109/L且LSM<30kPa 可替代傳統(tǒng)標準;而XL探頭則推薦血小板計數(shù)>110×109/L且LSM<25kPa的截斷值。與原標準相比,新方案分別減少了34.7%(M探頭)和10.5%(XL探頭)的內鏡篩查需求,同時仍保持HRV漏診率<5%[20]。Moctezuma-Velazquez等[21]則單獨在膽汁淤積性肝病患者中驗證了Baveno Ⅵ可以減少內鏡篩查,而在擴展Baveno Ⅵ中此類患者HRV漏診率>5%,適用性較差。在包含達到病毒學應答的病毒相關代償期肝硬化患者中,有研究驗證了Baveno Ⅵ標準的準確性,同時達到持續(xù)病毒學應答和符合Baveno Ⅵ的患者門靜脈高壓進展較少,生存時間相對較長[22]。對此Stafylidou等[23]針對兩類標準進行Meta分析,Baveno Ⅵ標準作為篩選cACLD患者HRV具有很高的診斷準確性。而擴大Baveno Ⅵ標準盡管可以進一步減少不必要的內鏡檢查,但HRV漏報率較高(HRV漏診率為5%)。我國Chess聯(lián)盟發(fā)起的一項多中心前瞻性研究,在基于Baveno Ⅵ標準下利用肝硬度、血小板、白蛋白、丙氨酸轉氨酶和靜脈曲張等級等無創(chuàng)參數(shù)建立了ABC無創(chuàng)模型并可預測代償期肝硬化患者CSPH(AUC=0.81),其中高危組診斷CSPH的陽性預測值可達93.0%[24]。綜上,雖然擴大Baveno Ⅵ標準可以進一步減少一部分不必要的內鏡檢查,但漏診率較高,仍具有局限性。
1.3" Baveno Ⅶ標準后肝硬度預測門靜脈高壓及食管胃底靜脈曲張的相關應用
2021年Baveno Ⅶ共識在相關研究的基礎上又提出無創(chuàng)預測CSPH的相關建議,LSM≤15 kPa且血小板計數(shù)≥150×109/L可排除cACLD的CSPH,對于病毒、酒精相關cACLD患者和非肥胖(體質量指數(shù)<30kg/m2)的非酒精性脂肪性肝炎相關cACLD患者LSM≥25kPa可診斷CSPH,即Baveno Ⅶ標準,而對于LSM<25kPa的病毒、酒精相關cACLD患者和非肥胖(體質量指數(shù)<30kg/m2)的非酒精性脂肪性肝炎相關cACLD患者ANTICIPATE模型可用于預測CSPH的風險[25-26]。一項單中心回顧性研究也驗證了Baveno Ⅶ標準可正確識別和排除CSPH,但仍有45.7%的人群未被分類,此類未分類的人群被稱之為“灰區(qū)”人群,由此提出Baveno Ⅶ-VITRO(血管性血友病因子抗原與血小板計數(shù)比)算法,其可將未被分類的人群降低到<15%,符合Baveno Ⅶ-VITRO算法納入CSPH之外的人群5年內失代償?shù)娘L險可忽略不計,不需要預防性治療[27]。目前針對伴有肝癌的患者利用Baveno Ⅵ及Baveno Ⅶ標準是否可以排除HRV及CSPH尚存在爭議[28-29],而對肥胖(體質量指數(shù)>30kg/m2)的非酒精性脂肪性肝炎患者相關的預測CSPH的相關無創(chuàng)診斷還需進一步研究論證。
2" 脾硬度預測CSPH及食管胃底靜脈曲張
肝硬化患者常伴隨門靜脈高壓,脾臟通過增加內臟血流量在決定門靜脈高壓中起著中心作用。而門靜脈高壓往往會引起脾臟組織增生,表現(xiàn)為脾臟淤血腫大和脾功能亢進,受此啟發(fā),隨著脾臟形態(tài)學的研究進展,SSM應運而生。而基于TE原理的SSM在臨床上接受度高,應用最為廣泛,目前主要通過肝臟硬度相關的SSM@50Hz探頭進行測量,而利用脾臟硬度專用的SSM@100Hz探頭測量的相關研究還處于起步階段[6]。2011年Stefanescu率[30]先提出脾硬度可預測肝硬化患者食管胃底靜脈曲張,脾硬度截斷值為52.5kPa。隨后的一項研究顯示,肝脾硬度在識別食管胃底靜脈曲張及CSPH上相比其他無創(chuàng)參數(shù)效果更佳,LSM≥25kPa、SSM≥55kPa預測CSPH和靜脈曲張具有良好的特異性[31]。Sharma等[32]研究顯示,脾臟硬度大小與靜脈曲張的嚴重程度顯著相關。Stefanescu等[33]驗證了LSPS、脾硬度、靜脈曲張評分等無創(chuàng)模型預測代償期肝硬化患者靜脈曲張的良好性能,并提出SSM>50kPa預測HRV的準確性較高。
在Baveno Ⅵ標準提出后,Colecchia等[34]首先提出SSM≤46kPa與Baveno Ⅵ標準相結合相比單獨使用Baveno Ⅵ標準將額外避免22.5%cACLD患者的內鏡檢查,且HRV漏診率小于5%。我國學者隨后驗證了Baveno Ⅵ標準結合SSM≤46kPa在排除慢性乙型肝炎相關肝硬化患者HRV中也具有良好表現(xiàn),HRV漏診率僅為4.3%(3/70)[35] 。Stefanescu等[36]針對不同探頭進行多中心前瞻性研究,結果顯示SSM@100Hz的檢測成功率明顯高于SSM@50Hz(92.5%比76%),而SSM@100Hz診斷高危食管胃靜脈曲張的AUC顯著高于SSM@50Hz(0.780比0.615)。Wong等[37]開發(fā)并提出了一項針對代償期肝硬化患者有別于Baveno Ⅵ標準的篩查方法,稱之為肝臟聯(lián)合脾臟硬度測定(LSSM)標準:LSM≥12.5kPa或SSM≥41.3需篩查胃鏡。LSSM篩查組與對照組隨訪5年靜脈曲張出血發(fā)生率大致相同,肝臟事件相關率也大致相同,兩者均無統(tǒng)計學意義,而LSSM標準將減少一半的內鏡篩查。
Baveno Ⅶ共識推薦病毒相關的cACLD患者SSM>50kPa及<21kPa可分別識別及排除CSPH。與此同時,在Baveno Ⅵ標準中需內鏡篩查的患者(TE的LSM≥20kPa或血小板計數(shù)≤150×109/L),滿足SSM<40kPa也可安全避免內鏡篩查[25],但目前相關臨床研究較少,仍需在不同場景驗證該推薦意見。
Dajti等[38]在Baveno Ⅶ標準基礎上提出了Baveno Ⅶ-單截斷值模型(至少存在以下兩個標準排除CSPH:LSM≤15kPa或血小板計數(shù)≥150×109/L或SSM≤40kPa,至少存在以下兩個標準診斷CSPH:LSM≥25kPa或血小板計數(shù)<150×109/L或SSM>40kPa)及Baveno Ⅶ-雙截斷值模型(至少存在以下兩個標準排除CSPH:LSM≤15kPa或血小板計數(shù)≥150×109/L或SSM<21kPa,至少存在以下兩個標準診斷CSPH:LSM≥25kPa或血小板計數(shù)<150×109/L或SSM>50kPa),驗證了Baveno Ⅶ模型可用于改進CSPH的無創(chuàng)診斷算法,同時將無法識別及排除CSPH的患者定義為“灰區(qū)”患者,而Baveno Ⅶ-單截斷值模型可將“灰區(qū)”患者顯著降低至7%~15%,且有良好的陽性預測值和陰性預測值(兩者均>90%),而在Baveno Ⅶ-雙截斷值模型中,陽性預測值相對不高(86%)。我國陳金軍團隊也成功驗證了采用SSM@50Hz和SSM@100Hz探頭的Baveno Ⅶ算法(即Baveno Ⅵ標準結合SSM<40kPa)在排除乙肝肝硬化患者的高風險靜脈曲張方面的效能顯著。在Baveno Ⅶ算法下,與SSM@50Hz相比,SSM@100Hz在安全豁免胃鏡篩查方面效能更佳(75.4%比59.5%)[39]。而在代償期肝硬化患者中,有多項研究利用Baveno Ⅶ標準將患者分為排除CSPH組、“灰區(qū)”組及CSPH組,三組患者3年后的失代償事件累計發(fā)生率有顯著差異(Plt;0.05),而Baveno Ⅶ標準聯(lián)合脾硬度在顯著減少“灰區(qū)”的前提下,仍可以有效區(qū)分三組患者的失代償風險[40-41]。近年一項薈萃分析將多個代償期肝硬化隊列在Baveno Ⅶ標準、Baveno Ⅶ-單截斷值模型及Baveno Ⅶ-雙截斷值模型中預測CSPH進行統(tǒng)計分析,與單獨使用Baveno Ⅶ標準相比,Baveno Ⅶ標準與SSM結合的算法具有良好的陰性預測值和陽性預測值,可顯著減少無法識別的“灰區(qū)”患者[42]。綜上,Baveno Ⅶ標準聯(lián)合脾硬度預測CSPH及HRV可顯著減少“灰區(qū)”患者,但目前相關高質量隊列研究仍較少,脾硬度減少“灰區(qū)”患者的相關截斷值仍需進一步論證。
3" 小結
CSPH及HRV是門靜脈高壓的重要事件,與患者預后息息相關。LSM是目前公認的識別CSPH及HRV的無創(chuàng)標志物。多項研究已經(jīng)證實LSM聯(lián)合血小板計數(shù)建立的Baveno Ⅵ標準可安全排除HRV,而Baveno Ⅶ標準可有效識別及排除CSPH。但上述兩種標準中均有大量患者無法被識別,存在失代償風險。盡管多項研究以LSM及血小板計數(shù)為基礎輔以無創(chuàng)指標建立新模型來減少未識別患者,但由于缺乏高質量研究驗證均未得到國際指南及學界的廣泛認可。在肝硬化患者中,肝硬度往往與HVPG緊密相關,但在HVPG>12mmHg的肝硬化患者中,肝硬度與HVPG的相關性明顯下降。一些肝外因素(內臟血管舒張、高動力循環(huán)、門體側支循環(huán)等)可能使門靜脈壓力升高,而LSM作為肝內無創(chuàng)參數(shù)無法體現(xiàn)這些變化[43]。SSM相比LSM與CSPH及HRV的相關性更高,可能是更可行的無創(chuàng)標志物,將SSM與LSM聯(lián)合可有效減少未識別的CSPH及HRV患者。
綜上所述,目前LSM和SSM可作為肝硬化患者CSPH及高出血風險食管胃靜脈曲張的快速、便捷、高效的無創(chuàng)標志物。但仍需通過高質量隊列來進一步探索LSM和SSM無創(chuàng)診斷重要事件(CSPH、HRV)的精確臨界值。目前國外的相關文獻較多,而國內研究較少,仍需開展多中心、前瞻性研究來驗證肝脾硬度測定在我國的適用性。
4" 參考文獻
[1] Simonetto DA,Liu M,Kamath PS.Portal hypertension and related complications: Diagnosis and management[J].Mayo Clin Proc,2019,94(4):714-726.
[2] de Franchis R,BavenoⅥ Faculty.Expanding consensus in portal hypertension: Report of the BavenoⅥ Consensus Workshop:Stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension[J].J Hepatol,2015,63(3):743-752.
[3] 祁小龍,王蕾,楊長青.門靜脈壓力測定方法及進展[J].中華實用診斷與治療雜志,2012,26(12):1145-1147.
[4] 周光文,關蛟.對門靜脈高壓癥規(guī)范治療的認識——如何理解共識與指南[J].中華普通外科雜志,2018,33(7):537-539.
[5] Castera L,Pinzani M,Bosch J.Non invasive evaluation of portal hypertension using transient elastography[J].J Hepatol,2012,56(3):696-703.
[6] 劉積慶,孟繁坤,丁惠國,等.脾臟硬度預測肝硬化患者門靜脈高壓及其并發(fā)癥的研究現(xiàn)狀[J].臨床肝膽病雜志,2023,39(5):1184-1190.
[7] Jung KS,Kim SU.Clinical applications of transient elastography[J].Clin Mol Hepatol,2012,18(2):163-173.
[8] Kazemi F,Kettaneh A,N'kontchou G,et al.Liver stiffness measurement selects patients with cirrhosis at risk of bearing large oesophageal varices[J].J Hepatol,2006,45(2):230-235.
[9] Lemoine M,Katsahian S,Ziol M,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[J].Aliment Pharmacol Ther,2008,28(9):1102-1110.
[10] Bureau C,Metivier S,Peron JM,et al.Transient elastography accurately predicts presence of significant portal hypertension in patients with chronic liver disease[J].Aliment Pharmacol Ther,2008,27(12):1261-1268.
[11] Hong WK,Kim MY,Baik SK,et al.The usefulness of non-invasive liver stiffness measurements in predicting clinically significant portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients:Korean data[J].Clin Mol Hepatol,2013,19(4):370-375.
[12] Kim BK,Han KH,Park JY,et al.A novel liver stiffness measurement-based prediction model for cirrhosis in hepatitis B patients[J].Liver Int,2010,30(7):1073-1081.
[13] Kim BK,Han KH,Park JY,et al.A liver stiffness measurement-based, noninvasive prediction model for high-risk esophageal varices in B-viral liver cirrhosis[J].Am J Gastroenterol,2010,105(6):1382-1390.
[14] Kim BK,Kim DY,Han KH,et al.Risk assessment of esophageal variceal bleeding in B-viral liver cirrhosis by a liver stiffness measurement-based model[J].Am J Gastroenterol,2011,106(9):1654-1662,1730.
[15] Berzigotti A,Seijo S,Arena U,et al.Elastography, spleen size, and platelet count identify portal hypertension in patients with compensated cirrhosis[J].Gastroenterology,2013,144(1):102-111.e1.
[16] Augustin S,Millán L,González A,et al.Detection of early portal hypertension with routine data and liver stiffness in patients with asymptomatic liver disease:A prospective study[J].J Hepatol,2014,60(3):561-569.
[17] Maurice JB,Brodkin E,Arnold F,et al.Validation of the BavenoⅥ criteria to identify low risk cirrhotic patients not requiring endoscopic surveillance for varices[J].J Hepatol,2016,65(5):899-905.
[18] Abraldes JG,Bureau C,Stefanescu H,et al.Noninvasive tools and risk of clinically significant portal hypertension and varices in compensated cirrhosis:The \"Anticipate\" study[J].Hepatology,2016,64(6):2173-2184.
[19] Augustin S,Pons M,Maurice JB,et al.Expanding the Baveno Ⅵ criteria for the screening of varices in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease[J].Hepatology,2017,66(6):1980-1988.
[20] Petta S,Sebastiani G,Bugianesi E,et al.Non-invasive prediction of esophageal varices by stiffness and platelet in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease cirrhosis[J].J Hepatol,2018,69(4):878-885.
[21] Moctezuma-Velazquez C,Saffioti F,Tasayco-Huaman S,et al.Non-invasive prediction of high-risk varices in patients with primary biliary cholangitis and primary sclerosing cholangitis[J].Am J Gastroenterol,2019,114(3):446-452.
[22] Thabut D,Bureau C,Layese R, et al.Validation of Baveno Ⅵ criteria for screening and surveillance of esophageal varices in patients with compensated cirrhosis and a sustained response to antiviral therapy[J].Gastroenterology,2019,156(4):997-1009.e5.
[23] Stafylidou M,Paschos P,Katsoula A,et al.Performance of Baveno Ⅵ and expanded Baveno Ⅵ criteria for excluding high-risk varices in patients with chronic liver diseases:a systematic review and Meta-analysis[J].Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol,2019,17(9):1744-1755.e11.
[24] Liu C,Li J,Wong YJ,et al.ABC:A novel algorithm to stratify decompensation risk in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (CHESS2108):An international, multicenter cohort study[J].Hepatol Int,2022,16(5):1105-1115.
[25] de Franchis R,Bosch J,Garcia-Tsao G,et al.Baveno Ⅶ-renewing consensus in portal hypertension[J].J Hepatol,2022,76(4):959-974.
[26] Pons M,Augustin S,Scheiner B,et al.Noninvasive diagnosis of portal hypertension in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease[J].Am J Gastroenterol,2021,116(4):723-732.
[27] Jachs M,Hartl L,Simbrunner B,et al.The sequential application of BavenoⅦ criteria and vitro score improves diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension[J].Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol,2023,21(7):1854-1863.e10.
[28] Wu CW,Lui RN,Wong VW,et al. BavenoⅦ criteria is an accurate risk stratification tool to predict high-risk varices requiring intervention and hepatic events in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma[J].Cancers (Basel),2023,15(9):2480.
[29] Allaire M,Campion B,Demory A,et al.BavenoⅥ andⅦ criteria are not suitable for screening for large varices or clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma[J].Aliment Pharmacol Ther,2023,58(3):346-356.
[30] Stefanescu H,Grigorescu M,Lupsor M,et al.Spleen stiffness measurement using Fibroscan for the noninvasive assessment of esophageal varices in liver cirrhosis patients[J].J Gastroenterol Hepatol,2011,26(1):164-170.
[31] Colecchia A,Montrone L,Scaioli E,et al.Measurement of spleen stiffness to evaluate portal hypertension and the presence of esophageal varices in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis[J].Gastroenterology,2012,143(3):646-654.
[32] Sharma P,Kirnake V,Tyagi P,et al.Spleen stiffness in patients with cirrhosis in predicting esophageal varices[J].Am J Gastroenterol,2013,108(7):1101-1107.
[33] Stefanescu H,Radu C,Procopet B,et al.Non-invasive ménage à trois for the prediction of high-risk varices:Stepwise algorithm using lok score, liver and spleen stiffness[J].Liver Int,2015,35(2):317-325.
[34] Colecchia A,Ravaioli F,Marasco G,et al.A combined model based on spleen stiffness measurement and BavenoⅥ criteria to rule out high-risk varices in advanced chronic liver disease[J].J Hepatol,2018,69(2):308-317.
[35] Wang H,Wen B,Chang X,et al.BavenoⅥ criteria and spleen stiffness measurement rule out high-risk varices in virally suppressed HBV-related cirrhosis[J].J Hepatol,2021,74(3):584-592.
[36] Stefanescu H,Marasco G,Calès P,et al.A novel spleen-dedicated stiffness measurement by FibroScan? improves the screening of high-risk oesophageal varices[J].Liver Int,2020,40(1):175-185.
[37] Wong GL,Liang LY,Kwok R,et al.Low risk of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis after variceal screening stratified by liver/spleen stiffness[J].Hepatology,2019,70(3):971-981.
[38] Dajti E,Ravaioli F,Marasco G,et al. A combined BavenoⅦ and spleen stiffness algorithm to improve the noninvasive diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease[J].Am J Gastroenterol,2022,117(11):1825-1833.
[39] Zhang X,Song J,Zhang Y,et al.BavenoⅦ algorithm outperformed other models in ruling out high-risk varices in individuals with HBV-related cirrhosis[J].J Hepatol,2023,78(3):574-583.
[40] Lin H,Lai JC,Wong GL,et al.Risk and predictors of hepatic decompensation in grey zone patients by the BavenoⅦ criteria:A competing risk analysis[J].Aliment Pharmacol Ther,2023,58(9):920-928.
[41] Song BG,Goh MJ,Kang W,et al.Validation of non-invasive diagnosis of CSPH in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease according to BavenoⅦ[J].Liver Int,2023,43(9):1966-1974.
[42] Dajti E,Ravaioli F,Zykus R,et al.Accuracy of spleen stiffness measurement for the diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease:A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis[J].Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol,2023,8(9):816-828.
[43] Vizzutti F,Arena U,Romanelli RG,et al.Liver stiffness measurement predicts severe portal hypertension in patients with HCV-related cirrhosis[J].Hepatology,2007,45(5):1290-1297.
[2024-10-07收稿]