Portal hypertensive gastropathy and gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Portal hypertensive gastropathy and gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) syndromePortal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) and gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE) syndrome are recently characterised entities that can be associated with gastrointestinal blood loss in patients with and without cirrhosis.Up to 65% of patients with portal hypertension from cirrhosis will develop PHG but it can also occur in the setting of non-cirrhotic portal hypertension.In patients with portal hypertension, PHG is often associated with the presence of oesophageal and/or gastric varices.The mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of PHG have not been fully elucidated.However, regulation of gastric nitric oxide, prostaglandins, tumour necrosis factor (TNF-), and epidermal growth factor (EGF) production may be involved.The mechanisms involved in the development of GAVE syndrome are also unclear.The classic features of this syndrome include red, often haemorrhagic, lesions predominantly located in the gastric antrum which can result in significant blood loss.More than 70% of patients with GAVE syndrome do not have cirrhosis or portal hypertension.However, in the setting of cirrhosis, GAVE syndrome can be diYcult to diVerentiate from PHG.This distinction is paramount in that PHG generally responds to a reduction in portal pressures whereas those with GAVE syndrome and coexisting portal hypertension generally do not respond to such therapy.This review will focus on the incidence, clinical importance, aetiology, pathophysiology, and treatment of PHG and GAVE syndrome, including diVerentiation between GAVE syndrome and PHG in the setting of portal hypertension. Portal hypertensive gastropathy
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".