A110 FEASIBILITY OF EUS-GUIDED PORTAL PRESSURE GRADIENT MEASUREMENT WITHOUT DEEP SEDATION: A PATH TO ACCURATE PORTAL PRESSURE DETERMINATION
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Aims Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is the gold standard for the diagnosis and staging of portal hypertension. Previous studies have shown that it underestimates pre-sinusoidal portal hypertension. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient (EUS-PPG) can safely measure direct portal vein pressure (PVP) and bridge this diagnostic gap. However, EUS-PPG has so far been performed with patients under deep sedation which can alter HVPG measurement and lead to misclassification of portal hypertension. Ketamine, a conscious sedation agent, has minimal effect on portal hemodynamics. We present our center’s experience with EUS-PPG under ketamine and low dose midazolam. Methods We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients undergoing EUS-PPG with conscious sedation using ketamine and low-dose midazolam (<0.02 mg/kg) at the McGill University Health Centre from February to May 2021. Patients were placed in the left lateral position. Hepatic vein and portal vein were located through EUS via a trans-gastric/hepatic approach. A through the scope 25-gauge needle attached to a manometer was advanced through the liver to measure hepatic vein pressure (HVP) and portal vein pressure (PVP). Three measurements were sampled per vessel and mean pressure differences calculated to obtain PPG. PPG was considered reliable if the differences between the values was no more than 1mmHg. Results Three patients underwent EUS-PPG for evaluation of pre-sinusoidal portal hypertension. Cirrhosis was excluded in all patients based on recent liver biopsy or transient elastography. The first patient is a 69-year-old man with splenomegaly and recanalization of the paraumbilical vein on imaging. He received 80 mg of ketamine and no midazolam. HVPG measured was 1 mmHg. EUS-PPG was successful with PPG of 6 mmHg (HVP= 7 mmHg, and PVP= 13 mmHg). The second patient is a 42-year-old woman with previous sleeve gastrectomy and known with portal cavernoma. She received 120 mg of ketamine and 1 mg of midazolam. EUS-PPG was technically difficult due to respiratory movements. The measurement was not considered reliable as differences in PPG were as high as 2mmHg. In this case, PPG was 0mmHg (HVP= 15mmHg, and PVP= 15mmHg). The third patient, a 74-year-old man with hepatic steatosis and splenomegaly received 70 mg of ketamine and 1 mg of midazolam. EUS-PPG was successful (HVP= 3mmHg, PVP= 3mmHg) yielding a PPG 0mmHg. All patients tolerated the procedure well with no procedural or sedation-related complications Conclusions Our early experience suggests that EUS-PPG can be successfully and safely performed in patients under conscious sedation with ketamine and low-dose midazolam. This combination may avoid deep sedation with high dose midazolam or propofol which are known to alter accuracy of HVPG. Measurement of HVP (left) and PVP (right) Funding Agencies None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».