Table 1.
Reported studies of portal biliopathy
| Ref. | Year of publication | City Country | Number of patients | Age (mean) | Male: Female | Biliary changes | Symptomatic disease |
| Khuroo et al[3] | 1993 | Kashmir India | 21 | 14.0 | 13:8 | 81% | 38% |
| Dilawari et al[6] | 1992 | Chandigarh India | 20 | 22.0 | 16:4 | 100% | 5% |
| Sarin et al[7] | 1992 | Delhi India | 20 | - | 16:4 | 90% | 15% |
| Bayraktar et al[8] | 1995 | Ankara Turkey | 44 | 31.5 | 24:20 | 94% | 30% |
| Malkan et al[9] | 1999 | Mumbai India | 20 | 23.0 | 12:08 | 85% | 10% |
| Nagi et al[10] | 2000 | Chandigarh India | 43 | - | 25:18 | 100% | 19% |
| Condat et al[11] | 2003 | Paris France | 25 | 49.5 | 15:1 | 84% | 28% |
| Sezgin et al[12] | 2003 | Mersin Turkey | 36 | - | 94% | 10% | |
| Khare et al[13] | 2005 | Lucknow India | 13 | - | 9:4 | 100% | 100% |
| Belhadjbrik et al[14] | 2006 | Tunis Tunisia | 17 | - | 100% | 82% | |
| Chevallier et al[15] | 2006 | Nice Cedex 3 France | 10 | - | 90% | 40% | |
| Dhiman et al[16] | 2007 | Chandigarh India | 53 | 24.5 | 36:17 | 100% | 24.5% |
| Vibert et al[17] | 2007 | Villejuif France | 64 | - | 100% | 30% | |
| Oo et al[18] | 2009 | Birmingham UK | 13 | - | 100% | 100% | |
| Llop et al[19] | 2011 | Barcelona Spain | 67 | 47.0 | 41:26 | 78% | 21% |
| Agarwal et al[20] | 2011 | New Delhi India | 39 | 29.6 | 27:11 | 100% | 100% |
| Aguirre et al[21] | 2012 | Bogota Columbia | 18 | - | 100% | 100% | |
| Aguilar-Olivas et al[22] | 2014 | DF Mexico | 4 | - | 100% | 100% |