Retrospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Gastroenterol. Jul 7, 2023; 29(25): 4072-4084
Published online Jul 7, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i25.4072
Table 1 Comparison of general characteristics in the modelling group
Parameter
Patients with LEVs, n = 74
Patients with HEVs, n = 66
T value/χ2 value
P value
Age in yr50.88 ± 11.6055.36 ± 11.10-2.3330.021
Male (%)43 (58.1%)37 (56.1%)0.0600.807
Etiology, HBV/HCV61/1353/130.1050.746
Table 2 Comparison of general characteristics in the external validation group
Parameter
Patients with LEVs, n = 28
Patients with HEVs, n = 32
T value/χ2 value
P value
Age in yr52.54 ± 13.7054.97 ± 10.40-0.7800.438
Male (%)15 (53.6%)14 (43.8%)0.5770.448
Etiology, HBV/HCV25/330/20.0240.876
Table 3 Univariate analysis of parameters of patients with high-risk esophageal varices and low-risk esophageal varices
Parameter
Patients with LEVs, n = 74
Patients with HEVs, n = 66
t/Z
P value
SSM, KPa22.70 ± 6.0019.06 ± 4.903.880< 0.001
PLT, × 109/L108.55 ± 68.1062.53 ± 29.005.096< 0.001
LSM, KPa14.90 ± 5.1024.83 ± 4.30-12.354< 0.001
ALT, IU/L37.50 (26.00, 49.50)23.00 (16.00, 35.00)-4.278< 0.001
AST, IU/L43.00 (31.75, 69.00)34.50 (27.75, 45.25)-2.7960.005
ALP, IU/L108.00 (81.25, 137.25)93.50 (78.00, 128.75)-1.0120.311
GGT, IU/L60.50 (28.00, 114.00)33.00 (19.75, 58.75)-3.609< 0.001
SLD, mm13.58 ± 3.1015.10 ± 3.30-2.8060.006
TBIL, μmol/L22.63 (16.01, 34.96)27.80 (18.05, 39.65)-0.9600.337
ALB, g/dL37.16 ± 8.3036.02 ± 5.800.9350.351
TCHO, mmol/L3.57 ± 1.403.18 ± 0.901.9810.050
PT, s12.45 ± 2.2013.34 ± 2.50-2.2840.024
INR1.13 ± 0.201.21 ± 0.20-2.1750.031
PTA, %82.15 ± 20.8075.09 ± 16.102.2280.028
PVD, mm12.20 ± 1.9013.64 ± 2.30-4.024< 0.001
CTLV, cm31031.88 ± 361.20920.85 ± 241.502.1110.037
CTSV, cm3558.11 ± 338.70808.25 ± 409.90-3.951< 0.001
Table 4 Multivariate analysis of parameters of patients with high-risk esophageal varices and low-risk esophageal varices
Parameter
Patients with LEVs, n = 74
Patients with HEVs, n = 66
t/Z
P value
SSM, KPa22.70 ± 6.0019.06 ± 4.903.8800.009
PLT, × 109/L108.55 ± 68.1062.53 ± 29.005.0960.606
LSM, KPa14.90 ± 5.1024.83 ± 4.30-12.354< 0.001
ALT, IU/L37.50 (26.00, 49.50)23.00 (16.00, 35.00)-4.2780.669
AST, IU/L43.00 (31.75, 69.00)34.50 (27.75, 45.25)-2.7960.125
60.50 (28.00, 114.00)33.00 (19.75, 58.75)-3.6090.790
SLD, mm13.58 ± 3.1015.10 ± 3.30-2.8060.952
PT, s12.45 ± 2.2013.34 ± 2.50-2.2840.883
INR1.13 ± 0.201.21 ± 0.20-2.1750.777
PTA, %82.15 ± 20.8075.09 ± 16.102.2280.920
PVD, mm12.20 ± 1.9013.64 ± 2.30-4.0240.220
CTLV, cm31031.88 ± 361.10920.85 ± 241.502.1110.892
CTSV, cm3558.11 ± 338.70808.25 ± 409.90-3.9510.713
Table 5 Parameters used to establish the non-invasive prediction model
Parameter
B
S.E.
Wald
P
Exp (B)
95%CI of exp (B)
SSM-0.2280.0749.6470.0020.7960.689-0.919
LSM0.6420.12327.245< 0.0011.9001.493-2.418
Constant-8.1842.30012.659< 0.0010.000-
Table 6 Comparison of various parameters of each model

Area
SE
P
95%CI of exp (B)
LSPS0.8350.033< 0.0010.771-0.900
VRI0.7440.041< 0.0010.663-0.824
AAR0.6410.0460.0040.550-0.732
Baveno VI0.6750.045< 0.0010.586-0.764
The new model0.9650.015< 0.0010.936-0.995
Table 7 Comparison of various parameters of each model

Sensitivity
Specificity
Accuracy, %
Positive predictive value, %
Negative predictive value, %
Cutoff value
LSPS89.3962.1674.3067.7886.813.12
VRI74.2467.5769.3067.0974.660.03
AAR75.7652.7057.9058.7870.951.27
Baveno VI198.4836.4965.7057.9996.42-
The new model100.0082.4389.3083.52100.000.27