Objective To investigate the value of different noninvasive diagnostic models in the diagnosis of esophageal and gastric varices since there is a high risk of esophageal and gastric varices in patients with compensated hepatitis B cirrhosis and significant portal hypertension， and to provide a basis for the early diagnosis of esophageal and gastric varices. Methods A total of 108 patients with significant portal hypertension due to compensated hepatitis B cirrhosis who attended Guangdong Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from November 2017 to November 2023 were enrolled， and according to the presence or absence of esophageal and gastric varices under gastroscopy， they were divided into esophageal and gastric varices group （GOV group） and non-esophageal and gastric varices group （NGOV group）. Related data were collected， including age， sex， imaging findings， and laboratory markers. The chi-square test was used for comparison of categorical data between groups； the least significant difference t-test was used for comparison of normally distributed continuous data between groups， and the Mann-Whitney U test was used for comparison of non-normally distributed continuous data between groups. The receiver operating characteristic （ROC） curve was plotted to evaluate the diagnostic value of five scoring models， i.e.， fibrosis-4 （FIB-4）， LOK index， LPRI， aspartate aminotransferase-to-platelet ratio index （APRI）， and aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase ratio （AAR）. The binary logistic regression method was used to establish a combined model， and the area under the ROC curve （AUC） was compared between the combined model and each scoring model used alone. The Delong test was used to compare the AUC value between any two noninvasive diagnostic models. Results There were 55 patients in the GOV group and 53 patients in the NGOV group. Compared with the NGOV group， the GOV group had a significantly higher age （52.64±1.44 years vs 47.96±1.68 years， t=0.453， P<0.05） and significantly lower levels of alanine aminotransferase ［42.00 （24.00 — 17.00） U/L vs 82.00 （46.00 — 271.00） U/L， Z=-3.065， P<0.05］， aspartate aminotransferase ［44.00 （32.00 — 96.00） U/L vs 62.00 （42.50 — 154.50） U/L，Z=-2.351， P<0.05］， and platelet count ［100.00 （69.00 — 120.00）×10⁹/L vs 119.00 （108.50 — 140.50）×10⁹/L， Z=-3.667， P<0.05］. The ROC curve analysis showed that FIB-4， LOK index， LPRI， and AAR used alone had an accuracy of 0.667， 0.681， 0.730， and 0.639， respectively， in the diagnosis of esophageal and gastric varices （all P<0.05）， and the positive diagnostic rates of GOV were 69.97%， 65.28%， 67.33%， and 58.86%， respectively， with no significant differences in AUC values （all P>0.05）， while APRI used alone had no diagnostic value （P>0.05）. A combined model （LAF） was established based on the binary logistic regression analysis and had an AUC of 0.805 and a positive diagnostic rate of GOV of 75.80%， with a significantly higher AUC than FIB-4， LOK index， LPRI， and AAR used alone （Z=-2.773，-2.479，-2.206， and-2.672， all P<0.05）. Conclusion FIB-4， LOK index， LPRI， and AAR have a similar diagnostic value for esophageal and gastric varices in patients with compensated hepatitis B cirrhosis and significant portal hypertension， and APRI alone has no diagnostic value. The combined model LAF had the best diagnostic efficacy， which provides a certain reference for clinical promotion and application.