Correlation and Consistency Analysis Between Various Indirect Portal Pressure Gradients and Actual Portal Pressure Gradient

Rufeng Chen,Yaozu Liu,Li Ma,Wen Zhang,Jiaze Yu,Minjie Yang,Jianjun Luo,Jingqin Ma,Yongjie Zhou,Zhiping Yan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5297383/v1
2024-01-01
Abstract:Objective: To evaluate the correlation and consistency between hepatic venous pressure gradient(F-HVPG) calculated as the wedged hepatic venous pressure (WHVP) minus free hepatic venous pressure (FHVP), I-HVPG calculated as WHVP minus inferior vena cava pressure (IVCP) in the hepatic segment, and portal pressure gradient (PPG). Methods: Data were collected from 112 patients with portal hypertension undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) along with HVPG measurement. FHVP, IVCP, WHVP, and portal venous pressure (PVP) were collected intraoperatively. Pearson’s correlation and Bland–Altman method were used to assess correlation and consistency. Results:A total of 112 patients were retrospectively collected. The correlation coefficient (r) velues (p < 0.001) between FHVP and IVCP, F-HVPG and I-HVPG, F-HVPG and PPG, I-HVPG and PPG were 0.835, 0.946, 0.667 and 0.698, respectively; the determination coefficient (R2) values were 0.697, 0.895, 0.445 and 0.487, respectively. Bland–Altman plots showed that F-HVPG and I-HVPG had the narrowest 95% limits of agreement. Among patients with FHVP-IVCP > 2 mmHg, the (r) vlues (p < 0.05) between F-HVPG and I-HVPG, F-HVPG and PPG,I-HVPG and PPG were 0.907, 0.648 and 0.807, respectively; the (R2) values were 0.822, 0.420 and 0.651, respectively. Bland–Altman plots showed that I-HVPG had the narrower 95% limits of agreement with PPG. Conclusion: F-HVPG and I-HVPG demonstrated high correlation and consistency. When the difference between FHVP and IVCP is greater than 2 mmHg, IVCP should be used to calculate HVPG instead of FHVP.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?