Non-invasive diagnosis of esophageal varices after Baveno VI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major complication of portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis is the development of esophageal varices with the associated risk of variceal bleeding. Hence, the Baveno consensus on portal hypertension in its first five editions had recommended surveillance with periodic upper endoscopies in these patients to identify in a timely fashion the development of esophageal varices and initiate a primary prophylaxis strategy in those at a high risk of bleeding. For the first time, the Sixth Baveno Consensus on Portal Hypertension (Baveno VI) recommended using non-invasive tools to rule out the presence of varices with a high risk of bleeding. According to Baveno VI, surveillance endoscopy is not necessary for patients with "compensated advanced chronic liver disease" (cACLD) who have normal platelets (>150×109/L) and a liver stiffness measure (LSM) <20 kPa. In this review, we will briefly describe the currently available non-invasive methods to predict the presence of varices, such as serum tests, imaging, and elastography. We will also discuss the rationale that led to Baveno VI recommendation and describe the studies that have validated Baveno VI criteria after its publication. Finally, we will mention some potential caveats and suggest some areas for future research.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".