Comparison of hepatic venous pressure gradient and two models of end-stage liver disease for predicting the survival in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis

Feasibility and safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic measurement of portal venous pressure

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The measurement of portal venous pressure (PVP) has been extensively studied, primarily through indirect methods. However, the potential of ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic PVP measurement as a direct method has been largely unexplored. This study aimed to investigate the accuracy, safety, and feasibility of this approach.

METHODS

In vitro, the experiment aimed to select a needle that could accurately transmit pressure, had a small inner diameter and was suitable for liver puncture, and performed on 20 healthy New Zealand white rabbits. An ultrasound-guided percutaneous transhepatic portal vein puncture was undertaken to measure PVP. Additionally, free hepatic venous pressure (FHVP) and wedged hepatic venous pressure (WHVP) were measured under digital subtraction angiography (DSA). The correlation between the two methods was assessed. Enroll study participants from October 18, 2023 to November 11, 2023 with written informed consent. Five patients were measured the PVP under ultrasound guidance before surgery to determine the feasibility of this measurement method.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the results obtained using 9 different types of needles (P > 0.05). This demonstrated a great repeatability (P < 0.05). The 22G chiba needle with small inner diameter, allowing for accurate pressure transmission and suitable for liver puncture, was utilized for percutaneous transhepatic PVP measurement. There were positive correlations between PVP and HVPG (r = 0.881), PVP and WHVP (r = 0.709), HVPG and WHVP (r = 0.729), IVCP and FHVP (r = 0.572). The PVP was accurately and safely measured in 5 patients with segmental hepatectomy. No complications could be identified during postoperative ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous transhepatic portal venous puncture under ultrasound guidance is accurate, safe and feasible to measure portal venous pressure.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

This study has been registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry with registration number ChiCTR2300076751.

Endovascular Assessment of Liver Hemodynamics in Patients with Cirrhosis Complicated by Portal Hypertension

The hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is currently considered the gold standard to assess portal hypertension (PH) in patients with cirrhosis. A meticulous technique is important to achieve accurate and reproducible results, and values obtained during measurement are applied in risk stratification of patients with PH, allocating treatment options, monitoring follow-up, and deciding management options in surgical patients. The use of portosystemic pressure gradients in patients undergoing placement of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts has been studied extensively and has great influence on decisions on shunt diameter. The purpose of this study was to describe the recommended technique to measure HVPG and portosystemic pressure gradient and to review the existing literature describing the importance of these hemodynamic measurements in clinical practice.

Correlation of pressure gradient in three hepatic veins with portal pressure gradient

BACKGROUND

The liver is one of the most important organs in the human body, with functions such as detoxification, digestion, and blood coagulation. In terms of vascular anatomy, the liver is divided into the left and the right liver by the main portal vein, and there are three hepatic efferent veins (right, middle, and left) and two portal branches. Patients with impaired liver function have increased intrahepatic vascular resistance and splanchnic vasodilation, which may lead to an increase in the portal pressure gradient (PPG) and cause portal hypertension (PHT). In order to measure the increased pressure gradient of portal vein, the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) can be measured to reflect it in clinical practice. The accuracy of PPG measurements is directly related to patient prognosis.

AIM

To analyze the correlation between HVPG of three hepatic veins and PPG in patients with PHT.

METHODS

From January 2017 to December 2019, 102 patients with PHT who met the inclusion criteria were evaluated during the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedure and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean HVPG of the middle hepatic vein was 17.47 ± 10.25 mmHg, and the mean HVPG of the right and left hepatic veins was 16.34 ± 7.60 and 16.52 ± 8.15 mmHg, respectively. The average PPG was 26.03 ± 9.24 mmHg. The correlation coefficient and coefficient of determination of the right hepatic vein, middle hepatic vein, and left hepatic vein were 0.15 and 0.02 (P = 0.164); 0.25 and 0.05 (P = 0.013); and 0.14 and 0.02 (P = 0.013), respectively. The mean wedged hepatic vein/venous pressure (WHVP) of the middle and left hepatic veins was similar at 29.71 ± 12.48 and 29.1 ± 10.91 mmHg, respectively, and the mean WHVP of the right hepatic vein was slightly lower at 28.01 ± 8.95 mmHg. The mean portal vein pressure was 34.11 ± 8.56 mmHg. The correlation coefficient and coefficient of determination of the right hepatic vein, middle hepatic vein, and left hepatic vein were 0.26 and 0.07 (P = 0.009); 0.38 and 0.15 (P < 0.001); and 0.26 and 0.07 (P = 0.008), respectively. The average free hepatic venous pressure (FHVP) of the right hepatic vein was lowest at 11.67 ± 5.34 mmHg, and the average FHVP of the middle and left hepatic veins was slightly higher at 12.19 ± 4.88 and 11.67 ± 5.34 mmHg, respectively. The average inferior vena cava pressure was 8.27 ± 4.04 mmHg. The correlation coefficient and coefficient of determination of the right hepatic vein, middle hepatic vein, and left hepatic vein were 0.30 and 0.09 (P = 0.002); 0.18 and 0.03 (P = 0.078); and 0.16 and 0.03 (P = 0.111), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Measurement of the middle hepatic vein HVPG could better represent PPG. Considering the high success rate of clinical measurement of the right hepatic vein, it can be the second choice.

Value of Liver Function Tests in Cirrhosis

The liver comprises both parenchymal and non-parenchymal cells with varying functions. Cirrhosis is often complicated by the development of portal hypertension and its associated complications. Hence, assessment of liver in cirrhosis should include assessment of its structural, function of both hepatic and non-hepatic tissue and haemodynamic assessment of portal hypertension. There is no single test that can evaluate all functions of liver and assess prevalence and severity of portal hypertension. Commonly available tests like serum bilirubin, liver enzymes (alanine [ALT] and aspartate aminotransferase [AST], serum alkaline phosphatase [ALP], gamma glutamyl transpeptidase [GGT]), serum albumin and prothrombin time for assessment of liver functions partly assess liver functions. quantitative liver functions like indocyanine clearance tests [ICG-K], methacetin breath test [MBT] were developed to assess dynamic status of liver but has its own limitation and availability. Imaging based assessment of liver by transient elastography, MRI based 99 mTc-coupled asialoglycoprotein mebrofenin scan help the clinician to assess liver function, functional volume of liver left after surgery and portal hypertension [PH]. Hepatic venous pressure gradient still remains the gold standard for the assessment of portal hypertension but is invasive and not available in all centres. Combinations of blood parameters in form of various indices like fibrosis score of 4 [FIB-4], Lok index, scores like model for end stage liver disease (MELD) and Child-Turcotte Pugh score are commonly used for assessing liver function in clinical practice.

The New Cutoff Value of the Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient on Predicting Long-Term Survival in Cirrhotic Patients

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the prognostic role of the categorized hemodynamic stage (HS) based on the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in patients with portal hypertension.

METHODS

Of 1,025 cirrhotic patients who underwent HVPG measurement, data on 572 non-critically-ill patients were collected retrospectively between 2008 and 2013. The following two HS categorizations were used: HS-1 (6-9, 10-12, 13-16, 17-20, and > 20 mmHg; designated as groups 1-5, respectively) and HS-2 (6-12, 13-20, and > 20 mmHg). Clinical characteristics, mortality rates, and prognostic predictors were analyzed according to the categorized HS.

RESULTS

During the mean follow-up period of 25 months, 86 (15.0%) patients died. The numbers of deaths in HS-1 groups were 7 (6.3%), 7 (6.9%), 30 (18.0%), 20 (15.6%), and 22 (34.4%), respectively (P < 0.001). However, the traditional HVPG cutoffs of 10 and 16 mmHg did not improve the discrimination of mortality. In contrast, the mortality rates did differ significantly between the three HS-2 groups (P < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, all models revealed that HS-2 was a common prognostic factor in predicting mortality. The mortality rates increased significantly according to HS-2 in patients with hypoalbuminemia (HVPG, 13-20 mmHg; hazard ratio [HR], 2.54 and HVPG > 20 mmHg; HR, 5.45) and intermediate model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score (HVPG, 13-20 mmHg; HR, 3.86 and HVPG > 20 mmHg; HR, 8.77; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Categorizing HVPG values according to HS-2 is a useful prognostic modality in patients with portal hypertension and can play an independent role in predicting the prognosis in patients with hypoalbuminemia and an intermediate MELD score.

Scoring systems for prediction of mortality in decompensated liver cirrhosis: A meta-analysis of test accuracy

AIM

To compare the accuracy of the scoring systems Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP), Model for End-stage Liver Disease score (MELD), MELD-Na, and MELD to Serum Sodium ratio (MESO) to predict the mortality in decompensated liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Ovid databases were systematically searched from inception to September 2018 for relevant articles, and we evaluated the quality of the included studies. The accuracy of scoring systems was analyzed with Stata 12 and MetaDiSc 1.4.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 2337 patients were included. The pooled areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of CTP, MELD, MELD-Na, and MESO to predict mortality were 0.81, 0.78, 0.85, and 0.86, respectively. Within 3 mo, the AUROCs of CTP, MELD, and MELD-Na in predicting mortality were 0.78, 0.76, and 0.89, respectively. The AUROCs of CTP, MELD, and MELD-Na at 3 mo were 0.86, 0.78, and 0.86, respectively. The AUROCs of CTP, MELD, and MELD-Na at 6 mo were 0.91, 0.83, and 0.90, respectively. The AUROCs of CTP, MELD, and MELD-Na at 12 mo were 0.72, 0.75 and 0.84, respectively. In cirrhotic patients with bleeding, the AUROCs of CTP and MELD were 0.76 and 0.88, respectively.

CONCLUSION

MESO has the highest AUROC in all assessed scoring systems. Considering the different time points, MELD-Na has good accuracy in predicting the mortality of decompensated liver cirrhosis. Compared to CTP, MELD is better in predicting variceal bleeding.

Portal hypertensive gastropathy as a prognostic index in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) is a frequently overlooked complication of liver cirrhosis (LC). The clinical implications of PHG as a prognostic factor of LC or a predictive factor for the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have not been established. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical significance of PHG in patients with LC.

METHODS

Patients with LC were prospectively enrolled and followed in a single tertiary hospital in the Republic of Korea. Baseline hepatic vein pressure gradient (HVPG) was measured, and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed. The associations of PHG with HVPG, survival and the development of HCC were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 587 patients were enrolled. The mortality rate was 20.3 % (n = 119), and HCC developed in 9.2 % (n = 54) during the follow-up period (32.6 ± 27.8 months). The grade of PHG was well correlated with HVPG (no PGH: median 9.2 [IQR: 7.2-16.7], mild PHG: 14.6 [10.1-19.3], and severe PHG: 17.3 [12.3-21.5], P < 0.001), as well as with Child-Pugh class, MELD score or survival. However, it was not associated with the development of HCC. The grade of PHG (HR 3.29, 95 % CI: 1.12-9.63, severe vs. no PHG) and Child-Pugh class (HR 3.53, 95 % CI: 1.79-6.97, Child C vs A) showed significant associations with mortality.

CONCLUSION

PHG was well correlated with portal hypertension and could be used as a prognostic factor for LC but not for the prediction of HCC.

Usefulness of portal vein pressure for predicting the effects of tolvaptan in cirrhotic patients

AIM: To elucidate influencing factors of treatment response, then tolvaptan has been approved in Japan for liquid retention.

METHODS: We herein conducted this study to clarify the influencing factors in 40 patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis complicated by liquid retention. Tolvaptan was administered at a dosage of 7.5 mg once a day for patients with conventional diuretic-resistant hepatic edema for 7 d. At the initiation of tolvaptan, the estimated hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) value which was estimated portal vein pressure was measured using hepatic venous catheterization. We analyzed the effects of tolvaptan and influencing factors associated with treatment response.

RESULTS: Subjects comprised patients with a median age of 65 (range, 40-82) years. According to the Child-Pugh classification, class A was 3 patients, class B was 19, and class C was 18. Changes from the baseline in body weight were -1.0 kg (P = 2.04 × 10^-6) and -1.3 kg (P = 1.83 × 10^-5), respectively. The median HVPG value was 240 (range, 105-580) mmH₂O. HVPG was only significant influencing factor of the weight loss effect. When patients with body weight loss of 2 kg or greater from the baseline was defined as responders, receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed that the optimal HVPG cutoff value was 190 mmH₂O in predicting treatment response. The response rate was 87.5% (7/8) in patients with HVPG of 190 mmH₂O or less, whereas it was only 12.5% (2/16) in those with HVPG of greater than 190 mmH₂O (P = 7.46 × 10^-4). We compared each characteristics factors between responders and non-responders. As a result, HVPG (P = 0.045) and serum hyaluronic acid (P = 0.017) were detected as useful factors.

CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that tolvaptan in the treatment of liquid retention could be more effective for patients with lower portal vein pressure.

Osteopontin: A non-invasive parameter of portal hypertension and prognostic marker of cirrhosis

AIM: To investigate the relationship between osteopontin plasma concentrations and the severity of portal hypertension and to assess osteopontin prognostic value.

METHODS: A cohort of 154 patients with confirmed liver cirrhosis (112 ethylic, 108 men, age 34-72 years) were enrolled in the study. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement and laboratory and ultrasound examinations were carried out for all patients. HVPG was measured using a standard catheterization method with the balloon wedge technique. Osteopontin was measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method in plasma. Patients were followed up with a specific focus on mortality. The control group consisted of 137 healthy age- and sex- matched individuals.

RESULTS: The mean value of HVPG was 16.18 ± 5.6 mmHg. Compared to controls, the plasma levels of osteopontin in cirrhotic patients were significantly higher (P < 0.001). The plasma levels of osteopontin were positively related to HVPG (P = 0.0022, r = 0.25) and differed among the individual Child-Pugh groups of patients. The cut-off value of 80 ng/mL osteopontin distinguished patients with significant portal hypertension (HVPG above 10 mmHg) at 75% sensitivity and 63% specificity. The mean follow-up of patients was 3.7 ± 2.6 years. The probability of cumulative survival was 39% for patients with HVPG > 10 mmHg and 65% for those with HVPG ≤ 10 mmHg (P = 0.0086, odds ratio (OR), 2.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-7.76). Osteopontin showed a similar prognostic value to HVPG. Patients with osteopontin values above 80 ng/mL had significantly lower cumulative survival compared to those with osteopontin ≤ 80 ng/mL (37% vs 56%, P = 0.00035; OR = 2.23, 95%CI: 1.06-4.68).

CONCLUSION: Osteopontin is a non-invasive parameter of portal hypertension that distinguishes patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. It is a strong prognostic factor for survival.

Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient Predicts Long-Term Mortality in Patients with Decompensated Cirrhosis

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to investigate the role of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) for prediction of long-term mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data from 97 non-critically-ill cirrhotic patients with HVPG measurements were retrospectively and consecutively collected between 2009 and 2012. Patients were classified according to clinical stages and presence of ascites. The prognostic accuracy of HVPG for death, survival curves, and hazard ratios were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 24 (interquartile range, 13-36) months, 22 patients (22.7%) died. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves of HVPG for predicting 1-year, 2-year, and overall mortality were 0.801, 0.737, and 0.687, respectively (all p<0.01). The best cut-off value of HVPG for predicting long-term overall mortality in all patients was 17 mm Hg. The mortality rates at 1 and 2 years were 8.9% and 19.2%, respectively: 1.9% and 11.9% with HVPG ≤17 mm Hg and 16.2% and 29.4% with HVPG >17 mm Hg, respectively (p=0.015). In the ascites group, the mortality rates at 1 and 2 years were 3.9% and 17.6% with HVPG ≤17 mm Hg and 17.5% and 35.2% with HVPG >17 mm Hg, respectively (p=0.044). Regarding the risk factors for mortality, both HVPG and model for end-stage liver disease were positively related with long-term mortality in all patients. Particularly, for the patients with ascites, both prothrombin time and HVPG were independent risk factors for predicting poor outcomes.

CONCLUSION

HVPG is useful for predicting the long-term mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, especially in the presence of ascites.

Evaluation of portal hypertension by real-time shear wave elastography in cirrhotic patients

BACKGROUND & AIMS

To assess the correlation between liver stiffness measurement (LSM) by real-time shear wave elastography (SWE) and hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and to investigate the diagnostic performance of SWE for predicting clinically significant and severe portal hypertension (CSPH and SPH).

METHODS

Clinical data of 115 cirrhotic patients with haemodynamic measurement were consecutively collected. Liver stiffness (LS) was measured using SWE by repeated performance five times per patient, and the median value and interquartile range of the parameters on the same day of HVPG measurement was calculated. CSPH and SPH were defined as a HVPG ≥10 mmHg and ≥12 mmHg respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients (male, 63; mean age, 53 ± 11.9 years) were eligible for analysis. CSPH and SPH were detected in 77 patients (83.7%) and 66 patients (71.5%) respectively. HVPG were significantly correlated with LSM in the overall, CSPH, and SPH patients (r = 0.646, 0.574 and 0.424 respectively; all P < 0.001). With ascites, the correlation coefficient did not decrease (r = 0.587). The AUROCs of LSM was 0.819 (95% CI, 0.725-0.892) for CSPH and 0.867 (95% CI, 0.780-0.928) for SPH. The cut-off values for determining CSPH and SPH were 15.2 kPa (Sensitivity, 85.7%; Specificity, 80.0%) and 21.6 kPa (Sensitivity, 83.3%; Specificity, 80.8%) respectively.

CONCLUSION

In cirrhotic patients, LSM by SWE is highly correlated with HVPG value regardless of ascites. SWE is a new reliable non-invasive diagnostic tool to predict CSPH and SPH, even in cirrhotic patients with ascites.

Staging of liver fibrosis or cirrhosis: The role of hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement

Liver fibrosis is a common histological change of chronic liver injury and it is closely related with portal hypertension which is hemodynamic complication of chronic liver disease. Currently, liver fibrosis has been known as a reversible dynamic process in previous literatures. Although liver biopsy is a gold standard for assessing the stage of liver fibrosis, it may not completely represent the stage of liver fibrosis because of sampling error or semi-quantative measurement. Recent evidences suggested that histologic, clinical, hemodynamic, and biologic features are closely associated in patients with chronic liver disease. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement has been known as a modality to evaluate the portal pressure. The HVPG measurement has been used clinically for fibrosis diagnosis, risk stratification, preoperative screening for liver resection, monitoring the efficacy of medical treatments, and assessing the prognosis of liver fibrosis. Therefore, the HVPG measurement can be used to monitor areas the chronic liver disease but also other important areas of chronic liver disease.

Risk factors for early rebleeding and mortality in acute variceal hemorrhage

AIM: To investigate the risk factors for 6-wk rebleeding and mortality in acute variceal hemorrhage (AVH) patients treated by percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization (PTVE).

METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of AVH patients who had undergone PTVE treatment was conducted between January 2010 and December 2012. Demographic information, medical histories, physical examination findings, and laboratory test results were collected. The PTVE procedure was performed as a rescue therapy for patients who failed endoscopic and pharmacologic treatment. Survival analysis was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. The multivariate analysis was performed using the Cox regression test to identify independent risk factors for rebleeding and mortality.

RESULTS: One hundred and one patients were included; 71 were males and the average age was 51 years. Twenty-one patients rebled within 6 wk. Patients with high-risk stigmata, PTVE with trunk obliteration, and a hepatic vein pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥ 20 mmHg were at increased risk for rebleeding (OR = 5.279, 95%CI: 2.782-38.454, P = 0.003; OR = 4.309, 95%CI: = 2.144-11.793, P < 0.001; and OR = 1.534, 95%CI: 1.062-2.216, P = 0.022, respectively). Thirteen patients died within 6 wk. A model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥ 18 and an HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg were associated with 6-wk mortality (OR = 2.162, 95%CI: 1.145-4.084, P = 0.017 and OR = 1.423, 95%CI: 1.222-1.657, P < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION: MELD score and HVPG in combination allow for early identification of patients with AVH who are at substantially increased risk of death over the short term.

Sarcopenia as a useful predictor for long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites

This study aimed to assess and compare sarcopenia with other prognostic factors for predicting long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites. Clinical data of 65 among 89 patients with measurement of all parameters were consecutively collected. Sarcopenia was evaluated as right psoas muscle thickness measurement divided by height (PMTH) (mm/m). During a mean follow-up of 20 (range: 1-49) months, 19 (29.2%) of 65 patients died. The values of the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of Child-Pugh score, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, MELD-Na, and PMTH for predicting 1-yr mortality were 0.777 (95% CI, 0.635-0.883), 0.769 (95% CI, 0.627-0.877), 0.800 (95% CI, 0.661-0.900), and 0.833 (95% CI, 0.699-0.924), whereas hepatic venous pressure gradient was not significant (AUROC, 0.695; 95% CI. 0.547-0.818, P=0.053). The differences between PMTH and other prognostic variables were not significant (all P>0.05). The best cut-off value of PMTH to predict long-term mortality was 14 mm/m. The mortality rates at 1-yr and 2-yr with PMTH>14 mm/m vs. PMTH≤14 mm/m were 2.6% and 15.2% vs. 41.6% and 66.8%, respectively (P<0.001). The mortality in cirrhotic patients with PMTH≤14 mm/m was higher than those with PMTH>14 mm/m (HR, 5.398; 95% CI, 2.111-13.800, P<0.001). In conclusion, sarcopenia, evaluated by PMTH, is an independent useful predictor for long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites.

Sarcopenia as a useful predictor for long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites

This study aimed to assess and compare sarcopenia with other prognostic factors for predicting long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites. Clinical data of 65 among 89 patients with measurement of all parameters were consecutively collected. Sarcopenia was evaluated as right psoas muscle thickness measurement divided by height (PMTH) (mm/m). During a mean follow-up of 20 (range: 1-49) months, 19 (29.2%) of 65 patients died. The values of the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of Child-Pugh score, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, MELD-Na, and PMTH for predicting 1-yr mortality were 0.777 (95% CI, 0.635-0.883), 0.769 (95% CI, 0.627-0.877), 0.800 (95% CI, 0.661-0.900), and 0.833 (95% CI, 0.699-0.924), whereas hepatic venous pressure gradient was not significant (AUROC, 0.695; 95% CI. 0.547-0.818, P=0.053). The differences between PMTH and other prognostic variables were not significant (all P>0.05). The best cut-off value of PMTH to predict long-term mortality was 14 mm/m. The mortality rates at 1-yr and 2-yr with PMTH>14 mm/m vs. PMTH≤14 mm/m were 2.6% and 15.2% vs. 41.6% and 66.8%, respectively (P<0.001). The mortality in cirrhotic patients with PMTH≤14 mm/m was higher than those with PMTH>14 mm/m (HR, 5.398; 95% CI, 2.111-13.800, P<0.001). In conclusion, sarcopenia, evaluated by PMTH, is an independent useful predictor for long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients with ascites.

Biomarkers of liver fibrosis

Liver fibrosis is the final common pathway for almost all causes of chronic liver injury. Liver fibrosis is now known to be a dynamic process having significant potential for resolution. Therefore, fibrosis prediction is an essential part of the assessment and management of patients with chronic liver disease. As such, there is strong demand for reliable liver biomarkers that provide insight into disease etiology, diagnosis, therapy, and prognosis in lieu of more invasive approaches such as liver biopsy. Current diagnostic strategies range from use of serum biomarkers to more advanced imaging techniques including transient elastography and magnetic resonance imaging. In addition to these modalities, there are other approaches including the use of novel, but yet to be validated, biomarkers. In this chapter, we discuss the biomarkers of liver fibrosis including the use of invasive and noninvasive biomarkers and disease-specific biomarkers in various chronic liver diseases.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient: clinical use in chronic liver disease

Portal hypertension is a severe consequence of chronic liver diseases and is responsible for the main clinical complications of liver cirrhosis. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement is the best available method to evaluate the presence and severity of portal hypertension. Clinically significant portal hypertension is defined as an increase in HVPG to >10 mmHg. In this condition, the complications of portal hypertension might begin to appear. HVPG measurement is increasingly used in the clinical fields, and the HVPG is a robust surrogate marker in many clinical applications such as diagnosis, risk stratification, identification of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who are candidates for liver resection, monitoring of the efficacy of medical treatment, and assessment of progression of portal hypertension. Patients who had a reduction in HVPG of ≥ 20% or to ≤ 12 mmHg in response to drug therapy are defined as responders. Responders have a markedly decreased risk of bleeding/rebleeding, ascites, and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, which results in improved survival. This review provides clinical use of HVPG measurement in the field of liver disease.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient: clinical use in chronic liver disease

Portal hypertension is a severe consequence of chronic liver diseases and is responsible for the main clinical complications of liver cirrhosis. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement is the best available method to evaluate the presence and severity of portal hypertension. Clinically significant portal hypertension is defined as an increase in HVPG to >10 mmHg. In this condition, the complications of portal hypertension might begin to appear. HVPG measurement is increasingly used in the clinical fields, and the HVPG is a robust surrogate marker in many clinical applications such as diagnosis, risk stratification, identification of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who are candidates for liver resection, monitoring of the efficacy of medical treatment, and assessment of progression of portal hypertension. Patients who had a reduction in HVPG of ≥ 20% or to ≤ 12 mmHg in response to drug therapy are defined as responders. Responders have a markedly decreased risk of bleeding/rebleeding, ascites, and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, which results in improved survival. This review provides clinical use of HVPG measurement in the field of liver disease.

Model for End-stage Liver Disease

Model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, initially developed to predict survival following transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt was subsequently found to be accurate predictor of mortality amongst patents with end-stage liver disease. Since 2002, MELD score using 3 objective variables (serum bilirubin, serum creatinine, and institutional normalized ratio) has been used worldwide for listing and transplanting patients with end-stage liver disease allowing transplanting sicker patients first irrespective of the wait time on the list. MELD score has also been shown to be accurate predictor of survival amongst patients with alcoholic hepatitis, following variceal hemorrhage, infections in cirrhosis, after surgery in patients with cirrhosis including liver resection, trauma, and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). Although, MELD score is closest to the ideal score, there are some limitations including its inaccuracy in predicting survival in 15-20% cases. Over the last decade, many efforts have been made to further improve and refine MELD score. Until, a better score is developed, liver allocation would continue based on the currently used MELD score.