4.1 Article

Noninvasive assessment of portal hypertension in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis

Journal

TURKISH JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages 239-246

Publisher

AVES
DOI: 10.4318/tjg.2012.0463

Keywords

Liver cirrhosis; alcohol; esophageal varices; portal hypertension; ultrasonography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background/aims: Portal hypertension and development of esophageal varices is one of the major complications of liver cirrhosis. The aim of our study was to evaluate the possibility of the presence of esophageal varices and their size using biochemical and ultrasonography parameters in patients with alcoholic liver cirrhosis. Material and Methods: We included in our study 86 patients (74 males, mean age 55 +/- 7) with alcoholic liver cirrhosis. The control group consisted of 102 patients with cirrhosis of other etiologies. All patients underwent a complete biochemical work up, upper digestive endoscopy and ultrasonography examination. The right liver lobe diameter/albumin and platelet count/spleen diameter ratios were calculated. The correlation of the calculated ratios with the presence and degree of esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis was also determined. Results: The mean value of right liver lobe diameter-albumin ratio was 6.15 +/- 1.77, and statistically significantly differed from values determined in the control group (4.97 +/- 1.68). The mean platelet count-spleen diameter ratio was 972.5 +/- 599.0 in alcoholic liver cirrhosis and 1055.9 +/- 821.3 in controls (p>0.05). In patients with alcoholic liver cirrhosis, none of the analyzed noninvasive markers was shown to be a good predictor of the presence and size of esophageal varices. Conclusions: Despite the important role of noninvasive markers in providing information pertinent to determination of esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis, these markers have limited relevance in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available