Introduction: We attempted to investigate non-invasive techniques and their diagnostic performances for evaluating clinically significant portal hypertension.
Evidence acquisition: The systematic search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science TM core index databases before 13 December 2018 restricted to English language and human studies.
Evidence synthesis: Thirty-two studies were included, with total populations of 3,987. The overall pooled analysis was performed by bivariate random effect model, which revealed significantly higher sensitivity and specificity of 77.1% (95% confidence interval, 76.8-78.5%) and 80.1% (95% confidence interval, 78.2-81.9%), respectively; positive likelihood ratio (3.67), negative likelihood ratio (0.26); and diagnostic odd ratio (16.24). Additionally, the area under curve exhibited significant diagnostic accuracy of 0.871. However, notable heterogeneity existed in between studies (I2=87.1%), therefore, further subgroup analysis was performed. It demonstrated ultrasonography, elastography, biomarker, and computed tomography scan had a significant overall summary sensitivity (specificity) of 89.6% (78.9%), 81.7% (83.2%), 72.2% (76.8%), and 77.2% (81.2%), respectively. Moreover, the areas under curve values were significantly higher in elastography (0.906), followed by computed tomography scan (0.847), biomarker (0.825), and ultrasonography (0.803).
Conclusions: In future, non-invasive techniques could be the future choice of investigations for screening and diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension in cirrhosis. However, standardization of diagnostic indices and their cut-off values in each non-invasive method needs to be addressed.