Multiparametric ultrasound for the prediction of the short-term outcome after esophageal varices band ligation

Figure 1 Flow diagram of patient selection and study progression. A total of 61 patients with cirrhosis undergoing endoscopic variceal band ligation were screened for eligibility. After applying exclusion criteria, 41 patients were included in the study and completed baseline and follow-up assessments. EVBL: Endoscopic variceal band ligation; US: Ultrasound; LSM: Liver stiffness measurement; SSM: Spleen stiffness measurement; DCE-US: Dynamic contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

Figure 2 Forest plot of predictive variables for esophageal variceal eradication with the corresponding odds ratios. Δ calculated variations between T1 and T0. VE: Variceal eradication; PE: Peak enhancement; AUC: Area under the curve; RI: Resistivity index; LSM: Liver stiffness measurement; SSM: Spleen stiffness measurement; ROI1: Region of interest-1 on liver parenchyma; ROI2: Region of interest-2 on portal vein.

Figure 3 Receiver operating characteristic curves comparing the three models developed to predict variceal eradication. VE: Variceal eradication; ROC: Receiver operating characteristic; AUC: Area under the curve.

Figure 4 Comparative performance of the three predictive models for variceal eradication. This bar plot illustrates the accuracy, area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity of three logistic models developed to predict variceal eradication. VE: Variceal eradication; AUC: Area under the curve; LSM: Liver stiffness measurement; SSM: Spleen stiffness measurement; ΔAUC ROI2: Variations between T1 and T0 in area under the curve of portal vein; ΔRI SA: Variations between T1 and T0 of splenic artery resistivity index; ΔPE ROI1: Variations between T1 and T0 in peak enhancement of liver parenchyma.