Evaluation of Liver Stiffness Measurement by Means of 2D-SWE for the Diagnosis of Esophageal Varices

Portal hypertension (PH) and esophageal varices (EVs) are a matter of extensive research. According to current Baveno VII guidelines, in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD), liver stiffness measurement (LSM) < 15 kPa and PLT count > 150 × 10⁹/L, upper endoscopy (UE) is not mandatory, and the emphasis should be set on non-invasive methods for evaluation of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). The aim of this study is to establish whether liver stiffness (LS) measured by 2D-SWE could be used as a predictor for the presence and severity of EVs in cirrhotic patients. In total, 86 patients of whom 32 with compensated liver cirrhosis (cLC) and 54 with decompensated liver cirrhosis (dLC) were examined in the Gastroenterology clinic of University hospital "Kaspela", Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Each patient underwent LS assessment by 2D-SWE and EVs grading by UE. EVs were detected in 47 (54.7%) patients, 23 (49%) of them were stage 4-high-risk EVs (HREV). The cut-off value for LS that differentiates HREV from the rest was set at 2.49 m/s with 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity (AUC 1.000, CI 0.925). Conclusions: 2D-SWE can be used as a non-invasive method in the assessment of only high-grade esophageal varices. For the other grades, upper endoscopy remains the method of choice.

Acute renal failure--etiologic and therapeutic considerations. A five-year experience at a single institution

In the present study we highlight the epidemiology, etiologic spectrum, and evaluation of ARF in adults. We then expand on the pathophysiologic mechanisms of renal failure and discuss the rationale for current therapeutic strategies in ARF patients. A total of 79 patients (45 male, female 34), aged 18-75 years (median age 51.2 +/- 17.7 years) with acute renal failure were studied in 5 years (January 1990 through October 1995). Emergency hemodialysis sessions following an acute anuric episode were instituted in 39 cases (49.3% of all patients). The median number of hemodialysis procedures per patient treated at our institution was 3.2 +/- 1.9. The total number of acute interstitial nephritis-associated ARF was 40. In 30 of them (75%) the acute renal insult included a combination of several therapeutic antimicrobial agents, in 2 cases (5%) ARF followed the administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, in 1 (2.5%) it resulted from a combined therapeutic regimen and in the remaining 5 (12.5%) from the application of a single drug. Acute interstitial nephritis developed in 2 patients following a viral infection. In the hemodialysis-treated ARF group 12 patients (29.77%) had interstitial nephritis and 2 patients (5.13%) presented with renal impairment for an unspecified period of time preceding the development of overt ARF. In a subset of this group of patients, ARF occurred in 7 patients (17.95%) following an urologic intervention, in 8 patients (20.51%) as a consequence of thermal or mechanical trauma or intoxication and in 3 cases (7.69%) it resulted from fever of unknown origin. Three patients with postoperative peritonitis and 4 other (10.26%) with postoperative complications were encountered in our series. No cases of septic abortion-related or obstetric-related ARF were recorded. 92.3% of all hemodialysis-treated patients seen at our Institution had received a combination of antibiotics and only 2 patients had been pre-treated with a single antimicrobial agent. Our results underscore the strong tendency towards diversity in the etiologic spectrum of clinical entities causing ARF and the increase in the number of acute interstitial nephritis. These factors highlight the importance of precise dosing and administration of drugs, especially antibiotics, as well as the duration of antibiotic treatment.