Journals / Anatolian Current Medical Journal / 2026 / Volume: 8 Issue: 5

Association between baseline FIB-4 score and bleeding presentation among cirrhotic patients with F3 esophageal varices without high-risk stigmata

Berk Baş(ADNAN MENDERES ÜNİVERSİTESİ, TIP FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-0652-2147
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-11
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These findings suggest that FIB-4 may provide complementary biological information beyond conventional endoscopic assessment and may contribute to individualized risk stratification following prospective validation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aims: Esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Although endoscopic grading is central to risk stratification, it remains uncertain whether non-invasive fibrosis-based indices provide additional discriminatory value among patients with advanced (F3) esophageal varices without high-risk endoscopic stigmata.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These findings suggest that FIB-4 may provide complementary biological information beyond conventional endoscopic assessment and may contribute to individualized risk stratification following prospective validation.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:FIB-4 · esophageal varices · variceal bleeding

Abstract

Aims: Esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. Although endoscopic grading is central to risk stratification, it remains uncertain whether non-invasive fibrosis-based indices provide additional discriminatory value among patients with advanced (F3) esophageal varices without high-risk endoscopic stigmata. Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included 69 cirrhotic patients with F3 esophageal varices without red wale marks at index endoscopy. Baseline Child-Pugh, Model for endstage liver disease (MELD), Aminotransferase-to-Platelet Ratio Index (APRI), and fibrosis-4 (FIB-4) scores were calculated using laboratory measurements obtained within one week of the index endoscopy. The primary outcome was the mode of clinical presentation during follow-up, defined as acute variceal bleeding requiring emergency endoscopy or elective endoscopic band ligation following the development of newly detected red wale marks during scheduled surveillance. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and logistic regression were performed to evaluate the association and discriminatory performance of baseline non-invasive markers. Results: During follow-up, 49 patients presented with acute variceal bleeding and 20 underwent elective endoscopic band ligation after developing newly detected red wale marks. Baseline FIB-4 scores were significantly higher in the bleeding presentation group than in the elective intervention group (4.9 vs. 2.9, p<0.001). FIB-4 demonstrated good discriminatory ability [area under the curve=0.816; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.710-0.910] and remained independently associated with bleeding presentation in multivariable logistic regression analysis (odds ratio 1.86, 95% CI 1.24-2.79; p=0.003). APRI and MELD showed lower discriminatory performance and were not independently associated with the study outcome. Conclusion: Among cirrhotic patients with F3 esophageal varices without high-risk endoscopic stigmata, higher baseline FIB-4 scores were independently associated with bleeding presentation during follow-up. These findings suggest that FIB-4 may provide complementary biological information beyond conventional endoscopic assessment and may contribute to individualized risk stratification following prospective validation.

🔖

Cite This Article

Küçükdemirci, Ö., Baş, B. (2026). Association between baseline FIB-4 score and bleeding presentation among cirrhotic patients with F3 esophageal varices without high-risk stigmata. Anatolian Current Medical Journal, Volume: 8 Issue: 5. https://doi.org/10.38053/acmj.1962302

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (22)

  1. de Franchis R, Bosch J, Garcia-Tsao G, Reiberger T, Ripoll C; Baveno VII Faculty. Baveno VII-renewing consensus in portal hypertension. J Hepatol. 2022;76(4):959-974. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2021.12.022
  2. Gralnek IM, Camus Duboc M, Garcia-Pagan JC, et al. Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline. Endoscopy. 2022;54(11):1094-1120. doi:10.1055/a-1939-4887
  3. Bosch J, Berzigotti A, Garcia-Pagan JC, Abraldes JG. The management of portal hypertension: rational basis, available treatments and future options. J Hepatol. 2008;48 Suppl 1:S68-S92. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2008.01.021
  4. Kaplan DE, Ripoll C, Thiele M, et al. AASLD practice guidance on risk stratification and management of portal hypertension and varices in cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2024;79(5):1180-1211. doi:10.1097/HEP.0000000000000647
  5. Ishida K, Namisaki T, Murata K, et al. Accuracy of Fibrosis-4 Index in identification of patients with cirrhosis who could potentially avoid variceal screening endoscopy. J Clin Med. 2020;9(11):3510. doi:10.3390/jcm9113510
  6. Thandassery RB, John N, Mashal FA, et al. Predicting esophageal varices and varices needing treatment in compensated advanced chronic liver disease. Dig Dis Sci. 2025;70(11):3679-3685. doi:10.1007/s10620-025-09193-7
  7. Cifci S, Ekmen N. Evaluation of non-invasive fibrosis markers in predicting esophageal variceal bleeding. Clin Endosc. 2021;54(6):857-863. doi:10.5946/ce.2021.028
  8. Tian Q, Liu Y, Cao Q, et al. Clinical value of APRI and FIB-4 on bleeding risk and 30-day prognosis in patients with liver cirrhosis complicated with esophagogastric varices. Int J Gen Med. 2025;18:6153-6167. doi:10.2147/IJGM.S545850
  9. Sterling RK, Lissen E, Clumeck N, et al. Development of a simple noninvasive index to predict significant fibrosis in patients with HIV/HCV coinfection. Hepatology. 2006;43(6):1317-1325. doi:10.1002/hep.21178
  10. Pons M, Augustin S, Scheiner B, et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of portal hypertension in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021;116(4):723-732. doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000000994
  11. Banini BA, Patel S, Yu JW, et al. Derivation and validation of a model to predict clinically significant portal hypertension using transient elastography and FIB-4. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2023;57(2):189-197. doi:10.1097/MCG.0000000000001664
  12. North Italian Endoscopic Club for the Study and Treatment of Esophageal Varices. Prediction of the first variceal hemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis of the liver and esophageal varices. A prospective multicenter study. N Engl J Med. 1988;319(15):983-989. doi:10.1056/NEJM198810133191505
  13. Garcia-Tsao G, Abraldes JG, Berzigotti A, Bosch J. Portal hypertensive bleeding in cirrhosis: risk stratification, diagnosis, and management: 2016 practice guidance by the American Association for the study of liver diseases. Hepatology. 2017;65(1):310-335. doi:10.1002/hep.28906
  14. Ripoll C, Groszmann R, Garcia-Tsao G, et al. Hepatic venous pressure gradient predicts clinical decompensation in patients with compensated cirrhosis. Gastroenterology. 2007;133(2):481-488. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2007.05.024
  15. Tsochatzis EA, Bosch J, Burroughs AK. Liver cirrhosis. Lancet. 2014;383(9930):1749-1761. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60121-5
  16. Wai CT, Greenson JK, Fontana RJ, et al. A simple noninvasive index can predict both significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2003;38(2):518-526. doi:10.1053/jhep.2003.50346
  17. Kamath PS, Wiesner RH, Malinchoc M, et al. A model to predict survival in patients with end-stage liver disease. Hepatology. 2001;33(2):464-470. doi:10.1053/jhep.2001.22172
  18. Ge J, Kim WR, Lai JC, Kwong AJ. "Beyond MELD"-emerging strategies and technologies for improving mortality prediction, organ allocation and outcomes in liver transplantation. J Hepatol. 2022;76(6):1318-1329. doi:10.1016/j.jhep.2022.03.003
  19. Tejedor M, Selzner N, Berenguer M. Are MELD and MELDNa still reliable tools to predict mortality on the liver transplant waiting list? Transplantation. 2022;106(11):2122-2136. doi:10.1097/TP.0000000000004163
  20. Yan P, Yu X, Chen Z, et al. Assessing the consistency of FIB-4, APRI, and GPR in evaluating significant liver fibrosis and cirrhosis in COVID-19 patients with concurrent liver diseases. BMC Gastroenterol. 2025;25(1):191. doi:10.1186/s12876-025-03770-w
  21. Moral K, Harputluoğlu M, Özkumur GF, et al. Comparison of MELD, MELD-Na, and MELD 3.0 scoring systems for transplant prioritization in the Turkish population: a multicenter study. Liver Transpl. Published online April 13, 2026. doi:10.1097/LVT.0000000000000863
  22. Maegawa FB, Shehorn L, Aziz H, Kettelle J, Jie T, Riall TS. Association between noninvasive fibrosis markers and postoperative mortality after hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(1):e187142. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2018.7142