Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurement in managing portal hypertension

Table 1 Endoscopic ultrasound portal pressure gradient study for portal hypertension assessment

Ref.	Type of study	Study design	Results	Technical success rate	Adverse events
Lai et al[30], 2004	Animal	Experimental	EUS-PVP correlated well with transhepatic catheterization (r = 0.91)	100%	None
Giday et al[31], 2008	Animal	Experimental	Consistent results of portal pressure measurements for 1 h	100%	None
Huang et al[32], 2016	Animal	Experimental	Excellent correlation between EUS and IR methods in all pressure range (r = 0.985-0.99)	100%	None
Schulman et al[33], 2017	Animal	Experimental	EUS-PPG results did not differ from transhepatic portal venule measurement	100%	None
Huang et al[34], 2017	Human (n = 28)	Pilot	EUS-PPG had an excellent correlation with clinical parameters of portal hypertension (P < 0.05)	100%	None
Zhang et al[35], 2021	Human (n = 12)	Cohort prospective	Good correlation between EUS-PPG and HVPG (r = 0.923)	91.7%	None
Choi et al[36], 2022	Human (n = 83)	Retrospective	EUS-PPG correlates well with clinical markers of portal hypertension (P < 0.05)	100%	None
Lesmana[37], 2022	Human (n = 13)	Case series	EUS-PPG showed consistent pattern of portal pressure	100%	None
Reddy et al[39], 2022	Human (n = 128)	Systematic review and meta-analysis	Good correlation between clinical portal hypertension and portal pressure gradients	91.61%	None
Lei et al[40], 2023	Human (n = 52)	Case series	EUS-PPG results are significantly higher in patients with a history of gastro-esophageal bleeding (P < 0.05)	98%	None

EUS-PPG: Endoscopic ultrasound portal pressure gradient; HVPG: Hepatic vein pressure gradient; PVP: Portal vein pressure; IR: Interventional radiology.