ReviewJournal of gastroenterology2025
Standard technique in Japan for measuring hepatic venous pressure gradient.
Review in Journal of gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Refining the role of liver transplantation as a curative treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma.International journal of clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Predictive value of subharmonic-aided pressure estimation for diagnosing clinically significant portal hypertension.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDirect measurement of portal venous pressure (PVP) is invasive, so the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is commonly measured to evaluate portal hypertension (PH). HVPG is the gold standard for estimating PVP but few reports have covered standardized measurement techniques.
methodsThis study validated standardized techniques for PVP measurement.
resultsIn Western countries, electronic transducers are commonly used to measure PVP, whereas the water column method is still frequently applied in Japan. Setting a reference point for accurate PVP measurement is important but complicated. According to Japanese guidelines, the reference point for PVP measurement is 10 cm above the dorsal surface or in the midaxillary line. For simpler determination, the anterior axillary point, defined as the point of convergence between the proximal pectoralis major muscle and arm when both arms are positioned against the trunk in a supine position, can be used as the reference point. New methods, such as endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient, offer less invasive alternatives. Non-invasive methods like elastography measure liver and spleen stiffness, which correlate with HVPG. The Baveno VII criteria incorporate measurements of liver and splenic stiffness for risk stratification. Biomarkers such as type IV collagen, M2BPGi, and FIB-4 score also predict HVPG. The Baveno VII consensus emphasizes the status of HVPG as the gold standard while advocating for non-invasive alternative methods to improve patient care and monitor treatment efficacy.
conclusionsContinued development of non-invasive tests is crucial for safer, more convenient PH management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.