Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastroenterol. Sep 7, 2025; 31(33): 107408
Published online Sep 7, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i33.107408
Published online Sep 7, 2025. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v31.i33.107408
Table 1 Comparison of the general characteristics of the modeling group
Parameter | Patients with compensatory stage of cirrhosis, n = 72 | Patients with decompensation of cirrhosis, n = 68 | T value/χ2value | P value |
Age, years | 52.83 ± 12.2 | 53.16 ± 10.9 | -0.168 | 0.867 |
Male (%) | 40 (55.6) | 40 (58.8) | 0.153 | 0.696 |
Etiology, HBV/HCV | 52/20 | 62/6 | 8.308 | 0.004 |
Table 2 Comparison of general characteristics in the external validation group
Parameter | Patients with compensatory stage of cirrhosis, n = 28 | Patients with decompensation of cirrhosis, n = 32 | T value/χ2value | P value |
Age, years | 52.54 ± 13.7 | 54.97 ± 10.4 | -0.780 | 0.438 |
Male (%) | 15 (53.6) | 14 (43.8) | 0.577 | 0.448 |
Etiology, HBV/HCV | 25/3 | 30/2 | 0.024 | 0.876 |
Table 3 Univariate analysis of parameters in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis
Parameter | Patients with compensatory stage of cirrhosis, n = 72 | Patients with decompensation of cirrhosis, n = 68 | t/Z | P value |
SSM, kPa | 23.50 ± 6.1 | 18.32 ± 4.2 | 5.866 | < 0.001 |
PLT, × 109/L | 110.51 ± 69.1 | 61.81 ± 25.7 | 5.463 | < 0.001 |
LSM, kPa | 15.53 ± 5.7 | 23.86 ± 5.2 | -9.023 | < 0.001 |
ALT, IU/L | 36.00 (24.00, 47.75) | 27.50 (17.00, 42.25) | -2.490 | 0.013 |
AST, IU/L | 40.50 (26.75, 58.75) | 38.00 (29.00, 56.75) | -0.452 | 0.651 |
ALP, IU/L | 105.00 (77.50, 143.00) | 98.50 (79.25, 135.50) | -0.709 | 0.478 |
GGT, IU/L | 61.00 (28.00, 120.00) | 34.50 (19.25, 59.50) | -3.718 | < 0.001 |
SLD, mm | 12.99 ± 3.0 | 15.68 ± 3.1 | -5.282 | < 0.001 |
TBIL, μmol/L | 29.64 ± 27.0 | 31.27 ± 16.2 | -0.430 | 0.668 |
ALB, g/dL | 38.69 ± 6.4 | 34.43 ± 7.4 | 3.691 | < 0.001 |
TCHO, mmol/L | 3.67 ± 1.3 | 3.09 ± 0.9 | 2.939 | 0.004 |
PT, seconds | 12.08 ± 1.9 | 13.70 ± 2.5 | -4.322 | < 0.001 |
INR | 1.10 ± 0.2 | 1.24 ± 0.2 | -4.029 | < 0.001 |
PTA,% | 84.91 ± 18.9 | 72.37 ± 17.0 | 4.123 | < 0.001 |
PVD, mm | 12.03 ± 1.6 | 13.78 ± 2.4 | -5.072 | < 0.001 |
CTLV, cm3 | 1055.93 ± 344.8 | 898.64 ± 257.3 | 3.045 | 0.003 |
CTSV, cm3 | 519.10 ± 296.0 | 842.19 ± 416.3 | -5.315 | < 0.001 |
Table 4 Multivariate analysis of parameters in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis
Parameter | Patients with compensatory stage of cirrhosis, n = 72 | Patients with decompensation of cirrhosis, n = 68 | t/Z | P value |
SSM, kPa | 23.50 ± 6.1 | 18.32 ± 4.2 | 5.866 | < 0.001 |
PLT, × 109/L | 110.51 ± 69.1 | 61.81 ± 25.7 | 5.463 | 0.575 |
LSM, kPa | 15.53 ± 5.7 | 23.86 ± 5.2 | -9.023 | < 0.001 |
ALT, IU/L | 36.00 (24.00, 47.75) | 27.50 (17.00, 42.25) | -2.490 | 0.597 |
GGT, IU/L | 61.00 (28.00, 120.00) | 34.50 (19.25, 59.50) | -3.718 | 0.566 |
SLD, mm | 12.99 ± 3.0 | 15.68 ± 3.1 | -5.282 | 0.037 |
ALB, g/dL | 38.69 ± 6.4 | 34.43 ± 7.4 | 3.631 | 0.207 |
TCHO, mmol/L | 3.67 ± 1.3 | 3.09 ± 0.9 | 2.939 | 0.224 |
PT, seconds | 12.08 ± 1.9 | 13.70 ± 2.5 | -4.322 | 0.480 |
INR | 1.10 ± 0.2 | 1.24 ± 0.2 | -4.029 | 0.584 |
PTA,% | 84.91 ± 18.9 | 72.37 ± 17.0 | 4.123 | 0.623 |
PVD, mm | 12.03 ± 1.6 | 13.78 ± 2.4 | -5.072 | 0.773 |
CTLV, cm3 | 1055.93 ± 344.8 | 898.64 ± 257.3 | 3.045 | 0.967 |
CTSV, cm3 | 519.10 ± 296.0 | 842.19 ± 416.3 | -5.315 | 0.895 |
Table 5 Parameters used to establish the noninvasive prediction model
Parameter | B | SE | Wald | Sig | Exp (B) | 95%CI of exp (B) |
SSM | -0.279 | 0.066 | 17.768 | < 0.001 | 0.756 | 0.664-0.861 |
LSM | 0.348 | 0.067 | 26.728 | < 0.001 | 1.416 | 1.241-1.616 |
SLD | 0.272 | 0.110 | 6.053 | 0.014 | 1.312 | 1.057-1.630 |
Constant | -4.969 | 2.245 | 4.899 | 0.027 | 0.007 |
Table 6 Comparison of various parameters of each model
Area | SE | Sig | 95%CI of exp (B) | |
LSPS | 0.834 | 0.034 | < 0.001 | 0.767-0.901 |
VRI | 0.824 | 0.035 | < 0.001 | 0.756-0.891 |
AAR | 0.670 | 0.046 | 0.001 | 0.580-0.760 |
Baveno VI1 | 0.680 | 0.045 | < 0.001 | 0.591-0.769 |
The new model | 0.944 | 0.018 | < 0.001 | 0.910-0.979 |
Table 7 Comparison of various parameters of each model
Sensitivity, (%) | Specificity, (%) | Accuracy, (%) | Positive predictive value | Negative predictive value | Youden index | Cutoff value | |
LSPS | 95.59 | 59.72 | 73.60 | 69.17 | 93.47 | 0.55 | 2.71 |
VRI | 66.18 | 84.72 | 72.90 | 80.37 | 72.60 | 0.51 | 0.80 |
AAR | 76.47 | 56.94 | 57.10 | 62.67 | 71.90 | 0.33 | 1.28 |
Baveno VI1 | 98.53 | 37.50 | 67.10 | 59.85 | 96.43 | 0.36 | |
The new model | 85.29 | 88.89 | 85.00 | 87.89 | 86.47 | 0.74 | 0.56 |
- Citation: Yang LB, Gao X, Xu M, Li Y, Dong L, Huang XD, She X, Zhang DY, Zhang QW, Liu CY, Fan ST, Wang Y. Noninvasive model based on liver and spleen stiffness for predicting clinical decompensation in patients with cirrhosis. World J Gastroenterol 2025; 31(33): 107408
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v31/i33/107408.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v31.i33.107408