A110 FEASIBILITY OF EUS-GUIDED PORTAL PRESSURE GRADIENT MEASUREMENT WITHOUT DEEP SEDATION: A PATH TO ACCURATE PORTAL PRESSURE DETERMINATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".