Enteral nutrition with or without N-acetylcysteine in the treatment of severe acute alcoholic hepatitis: a randomized multicenter controlled trial

Alcoholic liver disease: mechanisms of injury and targeted treatment

Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is a complex process that includes a wide spectrum of hepatic lesions, from steatosis to cirrhosis. Cell injury, inflammation, oxidative stress, regeneration and bacterial translocation are key drivers of alcohol-induced liver injury. Alcoholic hepatitis is the most severe form of all the alcohol-induced liver lesions. Animal models of ALD mainly involve mild liver damage (that is, steatosis and moderate inflammation), whereas severe alcoholic hepatitis in humans occurs in the setting of cirrhosis and is associated with severe liver failure. For this reason, translational studies using humans and human samples are crucial for the development of new therapeutic strategies. Although multiple attempts have been made to improve patient outcome, the treatment of alcoholic hepatitis is still based on abstinence from alcohol and brief exposure to corticosteroids. However, nearly 40% of patients with the most severe forms of alcoholic hepatitis will not benefit from treatment. We suggest that future clinical trials need to focus on end points other than mortality. This Review discusses the main pathways associated with the progression of liver disease, as well as potential therapeutic strategies targeting these pathways.

Angelica keiskei Koidzumi extracts improve some markers of liver function in habitual alcohol drinkers: a randomized double-blind clinical trial

Alcohol induces oxidative stress and inflammatory response, which can lead to hepatitis and cirrhosis. Previous studies reported that the extracts of Angelica keiskei Koidzumi (AKE) have antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties, suggesting that AKE could improve abnormalities associated with alcoholic liver disease. In this study, the effectiveness of AKE supplementation was assessed in 82 habitual alcohol drinkers (male: more than 14 units per week, female: more than 7 units per week) with abnormal liver biochemistry in a placebo-controlled, randomized double-blind trial over 12 weeks. Among the subjects, 65% (n=43) were heavy drinkers consuming more than 35 units per week. Among heavy drinkers, gamma-glutamyl transferase levels of 19 subjects per AKE-treated group were significantly decreased (21.16±37.63, P=.016) with significant differences observed compared to the 24 subjects per placebo group (P=.046). However, no significant differences were observed in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase levels between the AKE- and placebo-treated groups. These results suggest that AKE supplementation might improve liver function in heavy drinkers.

Cell death and cell death responses in liver disease: mechanisms and clinical relevance

Hepatocellular death is present in almost all types of human liver disease and is used as a sensitive parameter for the detection of acute and chronic liver disease of viral, toxic, metabolic, or autoimmune origin. Clinical data and animal models suggest that hepatocyte death is the key trigger of liver disease progression, manifested by the subsequent development of inflammation, fibrosis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Modes of hepatocellular death differ substantially between liver diseases. Different modes of cell death such as apoptosis, necrosis, and necroptosis trigger specific cell death responses and promote progression of liver disease through distinct mechanisms. In this review, we first discuss molecular mechanisms by which different modes of cell death, damage-associated molecular patterns, and specific cell death responses contribute to the development of liver disease. We then review the clinical relevance of cell death, focusing on biomarkers; the contribution of cell death to drug-induced, viral, and fatty liver disease and liver cancer; and evidence for cell death pathways as therapeutic targets.

Alcoholic liver disease: Treatment

The excess consumption of alcohol is associated with alcoholic liver diseases (ALD). ALD is a major healthcare problem, personal and social burden, and significant reason for economic loss worldwide. The ALD spectrum includes alcoholic fatty liver, alcoholic hepatitis, cirrhosis, and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma. The diagnosis of ALD is based on a combination of clinical features, including a history of significant alcohol intake, evidence of liver disease, and laboratory findings. Abstinence is the most important treatment for ALD and the treatment plan varies according to the stage of the disease. Various treatments including abstinence, nutritional therapy, pharmacological therapy, psychotherapy, and surgery are currently available. For severe alcoholic hepatitis, corticosteroid or pentoxifylline are recommended based on the guidelines. In addition, new therapeutic targets are being under investigation.

Prognosis and treatment of patients with acute alcoholic hepatitis

Despite alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is the most acute manifestation of alcohol-related liver disease, its treatment remains controversial. Corticosteroids, given either as monotherapy or together with N-acetylecysteine, have been associated with a moderate short-term survival benefit in patients with severe disease. The Maddrey's discriminant function; Glasgow alcoholic hepatitis score; age, bilirubin, INR and creatinine score; and the Model for end-stage liver disease have been proposed for stratifying prognosis in AH enabling selection of the patients to treat. Definition of treatment non-responders using the Lille model after 7 days of therapy may prevent a detrimental impact of prolonged corticosteroids. Pentoxifylline is an effective alternative reducing the occurrence of hepatorenal syndrome. Emerging evidence supports use of liver transplantation in a strictly selected subset of corticosteroid non-responders.

Alcoholic hepatitis: A comprehensive review of pathogenesis and treatment

Alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is an acute hepatic inflammation associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Current evidence suggests that the pathogenesis is the end result of the complex interplay between ethanol metabolism, inflammation and innate immunity. Several clinical scoring systems have been derived to predict the clinical outcomes of patients with AH; such as Child-Turcotte-Pugh score, the Maddrey discriminant function, the Lille Model, the model for end stage liver disease scores, and the Glasgow alcoholic hepatitis score. At present, Corticosteroids or pentoxifylline are the current pharmacologic treatment options; though the outcomes from the therapies are poor. Liver transplantation as the treatment of alcoholic hepatitis remains controversial, and in an era of organ shortage current guidelines do not recommend transplantation as the treatment option. Because of the limitations in the therapeutic options, it is no doubt that there is a critical need for the newer and more effective pharmacological agents to treat AH.

Current treatment options for alcohol-related liver disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The burden of alcohol on global health is increasing, and there is a strong relationship between population alcohol consumption and liver-related deaths. As alcohol-related liver disease (ArLD) often develops with no signs or symptoms, the prevention of liver disease relies on the recognition of harmful drinking and screening of those patients at risk for early markers of liver disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

A robust method of screening patients at risk of ArLD is essential. Once a patient develops ArLD, abstinence and early recognition of its complications are keys to improving outcomes. Corticosteroids remain the mainstay treatment in alcoholic hepatitis pending the results from large multicentre trials. More recently, there has been an increased interest in the use of rifaximin and albumin in various settings of ArLD.

SUMMARY

Advances in the treatment of ArLD and its complications, such as alcoholic hepatitis, will allow a greater proportion of patients chance for their liver to recover. However, new strategies to detect and intervene in those patients at higher risk of ArLD are likely to have the greatest overall impact.

Intravenous acetylcysteine for indications other than acetaminophen overdose

PURPOSE

The use of intravenous acetylcysteine for off-label indications, specifically non-acetaminophen-induced acute liver failure (NAI-ALF), severe alcoholic hepatitis, and contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), is reviewed.

SUMMARY

I.V. acetylcysteine is most often used as an antidote for acetaminophen overdose due to its ability to increase levels of glutathione; however, it is also used to treat NAI-ALF and severe alcoholic hepatitis and to prevent CIN. Although the i.v. and oral formulations of acetylcysteine have been evaluated for these indications, most studies have examined the i.v. form. I.V. acetylcysteine is used in the treatment of NAI-ALF to improve oxygenation to the liver. One large randomized trial of 173 adults with NAI-ALF from any etiology and of any grade encephalopathy demonstrated overall improvement in transplant-free survival, particularly for patients with low-grade encephalopathy, though overall survival was not improved. When used to treat severe alcoholic hepatitis, i.v. acetylcysteine serves as an antioxidant and glutathione source. A trial of 174 patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis revealed that patients had 28-day survival benefit when treated with acetylcysteine; improvement in patients with hepatorenal syndrome was also noted. When used for the prevention of CIN, i.v. acetylcysteine provides antioxidants and vasodilation. The benefit for this indication is limited to surrogate markers such as serum creatinine and in patients with multiple risk factors for the development of CIN.

CONCLUSION

Data regarding the use of i.v. acetylcysteine for the treatment of NAI-ALF and severe alcoholic hepatitis and in the prevention of CIN are inconclusive, though some evidence supports its use in certain populations.

Diagnosis and treatment of alcoholic hepatitis

Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is increasing in incidence in the UK. It is the commonest cause of liver-related deaths, predominantly in people below the age of 60. Alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is an acute form of ALD with high mortality when severe. Jaundice and coagulopathy are clinical hallmarks of severe AH. Histology findings are characterised by parenchymal inflammation and hepatocellular damage although biopsy is only required when diagnostic uncertainty exists; clinical findings are usually sufficient for accurate diagnosis. Patients with AH should be stratified as non-severe or severe using non-invasive scoring systems such as the discriminant function or the Glasgow Alcoholic Hepatitis Score. In patients with non-severe AH, abstinence is the mainstay of treatment, and it is important that steps are taken to help patients stop drinking. Severe AH requires specialist treatment. Consensus guidelines recommend the use of prednisolone although this remains subject to clinical trials. Pentoxifylline may have a survival benefit if corticosteroids are contraindicated. Nutritional support and N-acetylcysteine should be considered for use in conjunction with corticosteroids although evidence of benefit is not conclusive. Patients with severe disease who do not respond to therapy within a week have a very poor outcome. Recent data have shown a survival benefit of liver transplantation in this group although this remains experimental at present. Current and future research should focus on targeted therapies for severe AH and those who fail first-line treatment.

Invasive aspergillosis in patients with severe alcoholic hepatitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Severe alcoholic hepatitis (AH) has a poor short-term prognosis. Although infections are frequent complications of AH, the incidence of invasive aspergillosis (IA) and its impact on outcome remain unknown.

METHODS

We prospectively followed 94 biopsy-proven severe AH episodes for 3 months. We retrospectively reviewed our diagnosis of IA based on EORTC/MSG and AspICU criteria, except for host factors.

RESULTS

Fifteen IA (6 proven, 8 probable, and 1 possible) were diagnosed after a median delay of 26 days following diagnosis of AH. The sites of infection were the lungs (n=11) and central nervous system (n=2), while IA was disseminated in 2 cases. Baseline MELD score ≥24 and ICU admission were independent risk factors for IA. Thirteen IA occurred in the context of corticosteroids, and 2 had received no specific treatment for AH. Non-response to corticosteroids at day 7 was not a risk factor for IA, but IA was associated with absence of liver improvement at day 28. Despite antifungal treatment, 3-month transplant-free survival of patients with IA was 0% compared to 53% in those without IA. IA, Lille score ≥0.45, and overt encephalopathy were independent predictors of transplant-free mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

IA is a frequent complication of severe AH and carries a very high risk of mortality. Systematic screening for IA should be recommended in these patients. Further studies are needed to identify high-risk populations requiring antifungal prophylactic treatment.

[Management of severe alcoholic hepatitis]

Severe alcoholic hepatitis is still associated with high mortality and presence of liver failure manifested by jaundice, coagulopathy and encephalopathy is a poor prognostic indicator. The management of these patients includes at first hand several supportive measures as treatment of alcohol withdrawal, administration of fluid and vitamins and admission to an intensive care unit in the unstable patient. Glucocorticoids have been since decades the most intensively studied therapy in alcoholic hepatitis and are effective in certain subgroups. Indication for such a therapy is usually defined on a Maddrey Discriminant Function > 32. The Lille score at day 7 is used to decide whether corticosteroid therapy should be stopped or continued for a 1 month course. Nutritional supplementation is also likely to be beneficial. The main progress in better understanding its pathophysiology has come from cytokine studies. Various proinflammatory cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) or interleukin-1 (IL-1) have been proposed to play a role in this disease. This advancement has recently led to pilot studies investigating anti-TNF drugs such as pentoxifylline, infliximab (anti-TNF antibody) or etanercept in the treatment of this disease. These studies revealed besides for pentoxifylline rather negative results. Despite this fact, targeting of certain cytokines such as IL-1 remains an attractive treatment concept for this devastating disorder in the future.

Alcoholic hepatitis: diagnosis and management in 2012

Alcoholic hepatitis is a severe form of alcohol-related liver injury and one of the most frequent liver presentations seen by acute medical services. The condition typically affects young and middle-aged adults who present with jaundice and coagulopathy. Many patients fulfil the criteria for acute-on-chronic liver failure, though often the diagnosis of cirrhosis is only made after hospitalization. Despite over four decades of study, controversy surrounds many aspects of diagnosis and management, and short-term mortality in severe disease remains high. This review summarizes recent and important literature of relevance to clinicians, including aids to diagnosis, clinical prognostic scores and evidence for current medical therapies. Contentious issues such as the need for liver biopsy in diagnosis and the role for liver transplantation in those who fail to respond to medical treatment are also discussed.

Nutrition in alcoholic liver disease

The liver plays an important role in the metabolism, synthesis, storage, and absorption of nutrients. Patients with cirrhosis are prone to nutritional deficiencies and malnutrition, with a higher prevalence among patients with decompensated disease. Mechanisms of nutritional deficiencies in patients with liver disease are not completely understood and probably multifactorial. Malnutrition among patients with cirrhosis or alcoholic liver disease correlates with poor quality of life, increased risk of infections, frequent hospitalizations, complications, mortality, poor graft and patient survival after liver transplantation, and economic burden. Physicians, including gastroenterologists and hepatologists, should be conversant with assessment and management of malnutrition and nutritional supplementation.

Nutritional support for liver disease

BACKGROUND

Weight loss and muscle wasting are commonly found in patients with end-stage liver disease. Since there is an association between malnutrition and poor clinical outcome, such patients (or those at risk of becoming malnourished) are often given parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, or oral nutritional supplements. These interventions have costs and adverse effects, so it is important to prove that their use results in improved morbidity or mortality, or both.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, and oral nutritional supplements on the mortality and morbidity of patients with underlying liver disease.

SEARCH METHODS

The following computerised databases were searched: the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded (January 2012). In addition, reference lists of identified trials and review articles and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. Trials identified in a previous systematic handsearch of Index Medicus were also considered. Handsearches of a number of medical journals, including abstracts from annual meetings, were done. Experts in the field and manufacturers of nutrient formulations were contacted for potential references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials (parallel or cross-over design) comparing groups of patients with any underlying liver disease who received, or did not receive, enteral or parenteral nutrition or oral nutritional supplements were identified without restriction on date, language, or publication status. Six categories of trials were separately considered: medical or surgical patients receiving parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, or supplements.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The following data were sought in each report: date of publication; geographical location; inclusion and exclusion criteria; the type of nutritional support and constitution of the nutrient formulation; duration of treatment; any nutrition provided to the controls; other interventions provided to the patients; number, sex, age of the study participants; hospital or outpatient status; underlying liver disease; risks of bias (sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome reporting, intention-to-treat analysis, selective outcome reporting, others (vested interests, baseline imbalance, early stopping)); mortality; hepatic morbidity (development or resolution of ascites or hepatic encephalopathy, occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding); quality of life scores; adverse events; infections; lengths of stay in the hospital or intensive care unit; costs; serum bilirubin; postoperative complications (surgical trials only); and nutritional outcomes (nitrogen balance, anthropometric measurements, body weight). The primary outcomes of this review were mortality, hepatic morbidity, quality of life, and adverse events. Data were extracted in duplicate; differences were resolved by consensus.Data for each outcome were combined in a meta-analysis (RevMan 5.1). Estimates were reported using risk ratios or mean differences, along with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Both fixed-effect and random-effects models were employed; fixed-effect models were reported unless one model, but not the other, found a significant difference (in which case both were reported). Heterogeneity was assessed by the Chi(2) test and I(2) statistic. Subgroup analyses were planned to assess specific liver diseases (alcoholic hepatitis, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma), acute or chronic liver diseases, and trials employing standard or branched-chain amino acid formulations (for the hepatic encephalopathy outcomes). Sensitivity analyses were planned to compare trials at low and high risk of bias and trials reported as full papers. The following exploratory analyses were undertaken: 1) medical and surgical trials were combined for each nutritional intervention; 2) intention-to-treat analyses in which missing dichotomous data were imputed as best- and worst-case scenarios; 3) all trials were combined to assess mortality; 4) effects were estimated by absolute risk reductions.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials were identified; only one was at low risk of bias. Most of the analyses failed to find any significant differences. The significant findings that were found were the following: 1) icteric medical patients receiving parenteral nutrition had a reduced serum bilirubin (mean difference (MD) -2.86 mg%, 95% CI -3.82 mg% to -1.89 mg%, 3 trials) and better nitrogen balance (MD 3.60 g/day, 95% CI 0.86 g/day to 6.34 g/day, 1 trial); 2) surgical patients receiving parenteral nutrition had a reduced incidence of postoperative ascites only in the fixed-effect model (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.87, 2 trials, I(2) = 70%) and one trial demonstrated a reduction in postoperative complications, especially infections (pneumonia in particular); 3) enteral nutrition may have improved nitrogen balance in medical patients (although a combination of the three trials was not possible); 4) one surgical trial of enteral nutrition found a reduction in postoperative complications; and 5) oral nutritional supplements had several effects in medical patients (reduced occurrence of ascites (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.88, 3 trials), possibly (significant differences only seen in the fixed-effect model) reduced rates of infection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.99, 3 trials, I(2) = 14%), and improved resolution of hepatic encephalopathy (RR 3.75, 95% CI 1.15 to 12.18, 2 trials, I(2) = 79%). While there was no overall effect of the supplements on mortality in medical patients, the one low risk of bias trial found an increased risk of death in the recipients of the supplements. Three trials of supplements in surgical patients failed to show any significant differences. No new information was derived from the various subgroup or sensitivity analyses. The exploratory analyses were also unrevealing except for a logical conundrum. There was no difference in mortality when all of the trials were combined, but the trials of parenteral nutrition found that those recipients had better survival (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.98, 10 trials). Either the former observation represents a type II error or the latter one a type I error.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The data do not compellingly justify the routine use of parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, or oral nutritional supplements in patients with liver disease. The fact that all but one of these trials were at high risks of bias even casts doubt on the few benefits that were demonstrated. Data from well-designed and executed randomised trials that include an untreated control group are needed before any such recommendation can be made. Future trials have to be powered adequately to see small, but clinically important, differences.

Nutritional support for liver disease

BACKGROUND

Weight loss and muscle wasting are commonly found in patients with end-stage liver disease. Since there is an association between malnutrition and poor clinical outcome, such patients (or those at risk of becoming malnourished) are often given parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, or oral nutritional supplements. These interventions have costs and adverse effects, so it is important to prove that their use results in improved morbidity or mortality, or both.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, and oral nutritional supplements on the mortality and morbidity of patients with underlying liver disease.

SEARCH METHODS

The following computerised databases were searched: the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded (January 2012). In addition, reference lists of identified trials and review articles and Clinicaltrials.gov were searched. Trials identified in a previous systematic handsearch of Index Medicus were also considered. Handsearches of a number of medical journals, including abstracts from annual meetings, were done. Experts in the field and manufacturers of nutrient formulations were contacted for potential references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials (parallel or cross-over design) comparing groups of patients with any underlying liver disease who received, or did not receive, enteral or parenteral nutrition or oral nutritional supplements were identified without restriction on date, language, or publication status. Six categories of trials were separately considered: medical or surgical patients receiving parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, or supplements.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The following data were sought in each report: date of publication; geographical location; inclusion and exclusion criteria; the type of nutritional support and constitution of the nutrient formulation; duration of treatment; any nutrition provided to the controls; other interventions provided to the patients; number, sex, age of the study participants; hospital or outpatient status; underlying liver disease; risks of bias (sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome reporting, intention-to-treat analysis, selective outcome reporting, others (vested interests, baseline imbalance, early stopping)); mortality; hepatic morbidity (development or resolution of ascites or hepatic encephalopathy, occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding); quality of life scores; adverse events; infections; lengths of stay in the hospital or intensive care unit; costs; serum bilirubin; postoperative complications (surgical trials only); and nutritional outcomes (nitrogen balance, anthropometric measurements, body weight). The primary outcomes of this review were mortality, hepatic morbidity, quality of life, and adverse events. Data were extracted in duplicate; differences were resolved by consensus.Data for each outcome were combined in a meta-analysis (RevMan 5.1). Estimates were reported using risk ratios or mean differences, along with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Both fixed-effect and random-effects models were employed; fixed-effect models were reported unless one model, but not the other, found a significant difference (in which case both were reported). Heterogeneity was assessed by the Chi(2) test and I(2) statistic. Subgroup analyses were planned to assess specific liver diseases (alcoholic hepatitis, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma), acute or chronic liver diseases, and trials employing standard or branched-chain amino acid formulations (for the hepatic encephalopathy outcomes). Sensitivity analyses were planned to compare trials at low and high risk of bias and trials reported as full papers. The following exploratory analyses were undertaken: 1) medical and surgical trials were combined for each nutritional intervention; 2) intention-to-treat analyses in which missing dichotomous data were imputed as best- and worst-case scenarios; 3) all trials were combined to assess mortality; 4) effects were estimated by absolute risk reductions.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-seven trials were identified; only one was at low risk of bias. Most of the analyses failed to find any significant differences. The significant findings that were found were the following: 1) icteric medical patients receiving parenteral nutrition had a reduced serum bilirubin (mean difference (MD) -2.86 mg%, 95% CI -3.82 mg% to -1.89 mg%, 3 trials) and better nitrogen balance (MD 3.60 g/day, 95% CI 0.86 g/day to 6.34 g/day, 1 trial); 2) surgical patients receiving parenteral nutrition had a reduced incidence of postoperative ascites only in the fixed-effect model (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.87, 2 trials, I(2) = 70%) and one trial demonstrated a reduction in postoperative complications, especially infections (pneumonia in particular); 3) enteral nutrition may have improved nitrogen balance in medical patients (although a combination of the three trials was not possible); 4) one surgical trial of enteral nutrition found a reduction in postoperative complications; and 5) oral nutritional supplements had several effects in medical patients (reduced occurrence of ascites (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.88, 3 trials), possibly (significant differences only seen in the fixed-effect model) reduced rates of infection (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.99, 3 trials, I(2) = 14%), and improved resolution of hepatic encephalopathy (RR 3.75, 95% CI 1.15 to 12.18, 2 trials, I(2) = 79%). While there was no overall effect of the supplements on mortality in medical patients, the one low risk of bias trial found an increased risk of death in the recipients of the supplements. Three trials of supplements in surgical patients failed to show any significant differences. No new information was derived from the various subgroup or sensitivity analyses. The exploratory analyses were also unrevealing except for a logical conundrum. There was no difference in mortality when all of the trials were combined, but the trials of parenteral nutrition found that those recipients had better survival (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.98, 10 trials). Either the former observation represents a type II error or the latter one a type I error.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The data do not compellingly justify the routine use of parenteral nutrition, enteral nutrition, or oral nutritional supplements in patients with liver disease. The fact that all but one of these trials were at high risks of bias even casts doubt on the few benefits that were demonstrated. Data from well-designed and executed randomised trials that include an untreated control group are needed before any such recommendation can be made. Future trials have to be powered adequately to see small, but clinically important, differences.

[Alcoholic hepatitis]

Alcoholic hepatitis is one of the most severe presentations of alcoholic liver disease. It is usually revealed by the recent onset of jaundice in a patient with alcoholic cirrhosis. Maddrey's discriminant function can help to recognize patients with poor prognosis (the 6-month mortality is above 50% when it exceeds 32). Corticosteroids increase survival in those patients with high risk of death. Other treatments (pentoxifylline, N-acetyl-cysteine or enteral nutrition) need to be investigated further before to recommend their routine use instead of, or in association with, corticoids. Liver transplantation can be proposed to highly selected patients who do not respond to medical therapy. In any case, long-term prognosis will primarily depend on the maintenance of alcohol abstinence.

Oxidative stress and redox signaling mechanisms of alcoholic liver disease: updated experimental and clinical evidence

Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States and Europe. The spectrum of ALD ranges from fatty liver to alcoholic hepatitis and cirrhosis, which may eventually lead to hepatocellular carcinoma. In developed countries as well as developing nations, ALD is a major cause of end-stage liver disease that requires liver transplantation. The most effective therapy for ALD is alcohol abstinence; however, for individuals with severe ALD and those in whom alcohol abstinence is not achievable, targeted therapies are absolutely necessary. In this context, advances of our understanding of the pathophysiology of ALD over the past two decades have contributed to the development of therapeutic modalities (e.g., pentoxifylline and corticosteroids) for the disease although the efficacy of the available treatments remains limited. This article is intended to succinctly review the recent experimental and clinical findings of the involvement of oxidative stress and redox signaling in the pathophysiology of ALD and the development of mechanistically based antioxidant modalities targeting oxidative stress and redox signaling mechanisms. The biochemical and cellular sources of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (ROS/RNS) and dysregulated redox signaling pathways associated with alcohol consumption are particularly discussed to provide insight into the molecular basis of hepatic cell dysfunction and destruction as well as tissue remodeling underlying ALD.

Glucocorticoids plus N-acetylcysteine in severe alcoholic hepatitis

BACKGROUND

Mortality among patients with severe acute alcoholic hepatitis is high, even among those treated with glucocorticoids. We investigated whether combination therapy with glucocorticoids plus N-acetylcysteine would improve survival.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 174 patients to receive prednisolone plus N-acetylcysteine (85 patients) or only prednisolone (89 patients). All patients received 4 weeks of prednisolone. The prednisolone-N-acetylcysteine group received intravenous N-acetylcysteine on day 1 (at a dose of 150, 50, and 100 mg per kilogram of body weight in 250, 500, and 1000 ml of 5% glucose solution over a period of 30 minutes, 4 hours, and 16 hours, respectively) and on days 2 through 5 (100 mg per kilogram per day in 1000 ml of 5% glucose solution). The prednisolone-only group received an infusion in 1000 ml of 5% glucose solution per day on days 1 through 5. The primary outcome was 6-month survival. Secondary outcomes included survival at 1 and 3 months, hepatitis complications, adverse events related to N-acetylcysteine use, and changes in bilirubin levels on days 7 and 14.

RESULTS

Mortality was not significantly lower in the prednisolone-N-acetylcysteine group than in the prednisolone-only group at 6 months (27% vs. 38%, P = 0.07). Mortality was significantly lower at 1 month (8% vs. 24%, P = 0.006) but not at 3 months (22% vs. 34%, P = 0.06). Death due to the hepatorenal syndrome was less frequent in the prednisolone-N-acetylcysteine group than in the prednisolone-only group at 6 months (9% vs. 22%, P = 0.02). In a multivariate analysis, factors associated with 6-month survival were a younger age (P<0.001), a shorter prothrombin time (P<0.001), a lower level of bilirubin at baseline (P<0.001), and a decrease in bilirubin on day 14 (P<0.001). Infections were less frequent in the prednisolone-N-acetylcysteine group than in the prednisolone-only group (P = 0.001); other side effects were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although combination therapy with prednisolone plus N-acetylcysteine increased 1-month survival among patients with severe acute alcoholic hepatitis, 6-month survival, the primary outcome, was not improved. (Funded by Programme Hospitalier de Recherche Clinique; AAH-NAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00863785 .).

Alcoholic hepatitis: prognostic models and treatment

Alcoholic hepatitis is a distinct subset of alcoholic liver disease. Inflammation and oxidative stress are the two main pathogenetic mechanisms involved in its pathogenesis. Patients with mild disease usually improve with conservative management. However, about 30-50% of those with severe disease succumb to their illness within about 1 month. Therefore, assessment of disease severity is important and practical issue. Currently, hepatologists do not have an ideal scoring system available. With survival benefit of only about 50% with corticosteroids and pentoxifylline, there is need to develop newer and better treatment options to manage these patients. This article also deals with controversies surrounding the role and use of liver transplantation in patients with alcoholic hepatitis.