Short-term effects of propranolol on portal venous pressure

Outcomes of Esophageal Varices in Adults With Fontan Palliation and Liver Cirrhosis

Background

The purpose of this study was to define the risk and outcomes of esophageal varices in adults with Fontan palliation and liver cirrhosis undergoing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

Method

The results of EGD, abdominal ultrasound, and liver biopsy, as well as clinic notes from the hepatologist, were reviewed to determine the diagnosis of cirrhosis and esophageal varices. The incidence of acute gastrointestinal bleeding complication was assessed among patients with esophageal varices using the time of EGD as the baseline.

Results

Of 149 patients with Fontan palliation and liver cirrhosis, the prevalence of esophageal varices at baseline EGD was 34% (51 of 149). Of 98 patients without esophageal varices at baseline EGD, 27 (27%) underwent subsequent EGD, of whom 11 showed a new diagnosis of esophageal varices. The incidence of a new diagnosis of esophageal varices was 9% per year. Of 62 patients with esophageal varices, 9 (15%) had acute gastrointestinal bleeding complications during 45 (37-62) months of follow-up, yielding an incidence of 5% per year. Of the 9 patients, 8 underwent EGD and variceal banding during the hospitalization for bleeding and 1 patient died of septicaemia. Of the 8 patients who survived to hospital discharge, 2 patients were readmitted for esophageal bleeding within 12 months from the index hospitalization. Higher hepatic vein wedge pressure and hepatic vein pressure gradient were associated with esophageal varices and bleeding complications.

Conclusions

In this selected sample of adults with Fontan palliation and liver cirrhosis, esophageal varices were relatively common, and patients with esophageal varices had risk of bleeding complications.

Letter: NSBB for fatty liver disease-Still a long way to go. Authors' reply

This article is linked to Paternostro et al papers. To view these articles, visit https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.17653 and https://doi.org/10.1111/apt.17692

Overexpression of P-glycoprotein, MRP2, and CYP3A4 impairs intestinal absorption of octreotide in rats with portal hypertension

Background

Portal hypertension (PH) is the main cause of complications and death in liver cirrhosis. The effect of oral administration of octreotide (OCT), a drug that reduces PH by the constriction of mesenteric arteries, is limited by a remarkable intestinal first-pass elimination.

Methods

The bile duct ligation (BDL) was used in rats to induce liver cirrhosis with PH to examine the kinetics and molecular factors such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp), multidrug resistance-associated protein 2 (MRP2) and cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) influencing the intestinal OCT absorption via in situ and in vitro experiments on jejunal segments, transportation experiments on Caco-2 cells and experiments using intestinal microsomes and recombinant human CYP3A4. Moreover, RT-PCR, western blot, and immunohistochemistry were performed.

Results

Both in situ and in vitro experiments in jejunal segments showed that intestinal OCT absorption in both control and PH rats was largely controlled by P-gp and, to a lesser extent, by MRP2. OCT transport mediated by P-gp and MRP2 was demonstrated on Caco-2 cells. The results of RT-PCR, western blot, and immunohistochemistry suggested that impaired OCT absorption in PH was in part due to the jejunal upregulation of these two transporters. The use of intestinal microsomes and recombinant human CYP3A4 revealed that CYP3A4 metabolized OCT, and its upregulation in PH likely contributed to impaired drug absorption.

Conclusions

Inhibition of P-gp, MRP2, and CYP3A4 might represent a valid option for decreasing intestinal first-pass effects on orally administered OCT, thereby increasing its bioavailability to alleviate PH in patients with cirrhosis.

Beta-blockers in cirrhosis: Evidence-based indications and limitations

Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) are the mainstay of treatment for portal hypertension in the setting of liver cirrhosis. Randomised controlled trials demonstrated their efficacy in preventing initial variceal bleeding and subsequent rebleeding. Recent evidence indicates that NSBBs could prevent liver decompensation in patients with compensated cirrhosis. Despite solid data favouring NSBB use in cirrhosis, some studies have highlighted relevant safety issues in patients with end-stage liver disease, particularly with refractory ascites and infection. This review summarises the evidence supporting current recommendations and restrictions of NSBB use in patients with cirrhosis.

Metabolomics discloses potential biomarkers to predict the acute HVPG response to propranolol in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

In cirrhosis, a decrease in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) > 10% after acute iv propranolol (HVPG response) is associated with a lower risk of decompensation and death. Only a part of patients are HVPG responders and there are no accurate non-invasive markers to identify them. We aimed at discovering metabolomic biomarkers of HVPG responders to propranolol.

METHODS

Sixty-six patients with cirrhosis and HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg in whom the acute HVPG response to propranolol was assessed, were prospectively included. A targeted metabolomic serum analysis using ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry was performed. Different combinations of 2-3 metabolites identifying HVPG responders (HVPG reduction > 10%) were obtained by stepwise logistic regression. The best of these model (AUROC, Akaike criterion) underwent internal cross-validation and cut-offs to classify responders/non-responders was proposed.

RESULTS

A total of 41/66 (62%) patients were HVPG responders. Three hundred and eighty-nine metabolites were detected and 177 were finally eligible. Eighteen metabolites were associated to the HVPG response at univariate analysis; at multivariable analysis, a model including a phosphatidylcholine (PC(P-16:0/22:6)) and a free fatty acid (20:2(n-6), eicosadienoic acid) performed well for HVPG response, with an AUROC of 0.801 (0.761 at internal validation). The cut-off 0.629 was the most efficient for overall classification (49/66 patients correctly classified). Two cut-off values allowed identifying responders (0.688, PPV 84%) and non-responders (0.384, NPV 82%) with undetermined values for 17/66 patients. Clinical variables did not add to the model.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of two metabolites helps at identifying HVPG responders to acute propranolol. It could be a useful non-invasive test to classify the HVPG response to propranolol.

Portal Hypertension and Related Complications: Diagnosis and Management

Portal hypertension is a major complication of cirrhosis, and its consequences, including ascites, esophageal varices, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatorenal syndrome, lead to substantial morbidity and mortality. The past several decades have seen major improvements in the clinical management of complications of portal hypertension, resulting in substantial gains in patient outcomes. However, important challenges remain. This review focuses on the pathophysiology and diagnosis of portal hypertension and discusses general approaches in the management of patients with ascites as a result of portal hypertension.

Dose-dependent effect of propranolol on the hemodynamic response in cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices

OBJECTIVE

Propranolol is always titrated to the maximum tolerated dose to prevent gastroesophageal variceal bleeding. However, some patients do not achieve a hemodynamic response and experience more intolerance and discontinuation. This study evaluated the dose-dependent effect of propranolol on hemodynamic response and tolerance in cirrhotic patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 95 consecutive patients recruited from our prospective database. After hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement, patients received propranolol 10 mg, twice daily increased 10 mg daily until to 80 or 120 mg/day. Secondary hepatic venous pressure gradient was also measured. For nonresponders at 80 mg/day, propranolol was titrated to 120 mg/day.

RESULTS

For 58 patients, propranolol was titrated to 80 mg/day, whereas for 37 patients, it was titrated to 120 mg/day. Hemodynamic response was similar in both groups (50 vs. 54.1%, P=0.700). Eighteen of the 29 nonresponders at propranolol 80 mg/day received a dose of 120 mg/day. Two patients achieved a hemodynamic response, but two could not tolerate the dose. Nine (15.5%) patients achieved the target dose of propranolol at 80 mg/day, whereas 16 (43.2%) patients at 120 mg/day achieved this (P=0.003). The difference in patients achieving the target dose between responders and nonresponders was not significant (14 vs. 14, P=0.642). Reduction or discontinuation was required by two (6.9%) patients using 80 mg/day propranolol and six (30%) patients using 120 mg/day propranolol (P=0.032).

CONCLUSION

There is no dose-dependent effect of 80-120 mg/day of propranolol on the hemodynamic response in cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices. This indicates that low-dose propranolol below the target dose might lead to a considerable hemodynamic response and is much safer and well tolerated.

Changes in transient elastography in early cirrhotic patients after receiving nonselective B-blocker for primary variceal bleeding prophylaxis: Three-month follow up

BACKGROUND AND AIM

A nonselective B-blocker (NSBB) is recommended for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. The impact of treatment with NSBB on modulating transient elastography (TE) has not been reported. The aim of the study is to investigate the effect of NSBB treatment on TE in early cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

In this prospective study, we enrolled all early cirrhotic patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and showed small esophageal varices (EV) at our institute for a period of 1 year. The TE and heart rate (HR) of all participants were measured before and 3 months after receiving NSBB.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients receiving propanolol for 3 months were analyzed. There were 16 patients in the HR responder group (41%) and 23 patients in the HR nonresponder group (59%). The reduction of TE was preferably found in the HR responder group compared with the HR nonresponder group, in which mean changes in TE were -5.6 and -0.7 kPa, respectively (P = 0.23). In addition, we categorized the patients using their TE responses. Twenty-five patients (64.1%) showed reduced TE during the follow-up period, in which the mean TE value change was -2.94 kPa. Using correlation analysis, TE and HR responses were insignificantly correlated (r = 0.23, P = 0.15).

CONCLUSION

The NSBB administered for 3 months mainly improved TE value in early cirrhotic patients even though the changes of HR and TE did not correlate. Further study is needed to confirm whether the monitoring of TE change may be a better predictor for pharmacological response than the HR response.

Carvedilol for reducing portal pressure in primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding: a dose-response study

BACKGROUND

Sequential measurements of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) are used to assess the haemodynamic response to nonselective betablockers (NSBBs) in patients with portal hypertension.

AIMS

To assess the rates of HVPG response to different doses of carvedilol.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with cirrhosis undergoing HVPG-guided carvedilol therapy for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding between 08/2010 and 05/2015 were retrospectively included. After baseline HVPG measurement, carvedilol 6.25 mg/d was administered and HVPG response (HVPG-decrease ≥20% or to ≤12 mm Hg) was assessed after 3-4 weeks. In case of nonresponse, carvedilol dose was increased to 12.5 mg/d and a third HVPG-measurement was performed after 3-4 weeks. We also assessed HVPG-response rates according to the Baveno VI consensus (HVPG decrease ≥10% or to ≤12 mm Hg) and changes in systolic arterial pressure (SAP).

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients (Child A, 37%; B, 35%; C, 28%) were included. 28 (39%) patients achieved a HVPG-decrease ≥ 20% with carvedilol 6.25 mg/d and another 10 (14%) with carvedilol 12.5 mg/d. Forty (56%) patients had a HVPG decrease ≥10% with carvedilol 6.25 mg/d and 24 (33%) with carvedilol 12.5 mg/d. Thus, in total, a HVPG-response of ≥20% and ≥10% and was achieved in 38 (53%) and 55 (76%) and of patients respectively. Notably, 6 patients (n = 4 with ascites) did not tolerate an increase to 12.5 mg/d due to hypotension/bradycardia. However, none of the other patients had a SAP < 90 mm Hg at the final HVPG measurement.

CONCLUSION

Carvedilol 12.5 mg/d was more effective than 6.25 mg/d in decreasing HVPG in primary prophylaxis. A total of 76% of patients achieved a HVPG-response of ≥ 10% to carvedilol 12.5 mg/d, however, arterial hypotension might occur, especially in patients with ascites.

Diagnostic validity of flow cytometry vs manual counting of polymorphonuclear leukocytes in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is frequently occurring infection among patients with liver cirrhosis, defined by polymorphonuclear (PMN) leukocytic count ≥250 cell/mm³ with or without a positive ascitic fluid (AF) bacterial culture. So, this study aimed to investigate the diagnostic value of flow cytometry versus manual counting of ascitic fluid PMNL in cirrhotic patients, with clinical suspicion of SBP.

METHODS

A hospital-based cross-sectional study was carried out on 320 cirrhotic patients with clinical suspicion of SBP. Abdominal paracentesis was performed in all cases for microscopic manual and flow cytometry counting of PMNL. Anti-HLA-DR, anti-CD15, anti-CD16, and anti-CD45 monoclonal antibodies were used for flow cytometry method.

RESULTS

Flow cytometric PMNL count had 100% sensitivity and specificity, while manual PMNL count had a sensitivity of 65.52% and specificity of 90% with significant difference (P value < .05).

CONCLUSION

Flow cytometry is more reliable rapid method for PMNL counting, than the manual method that is less accurate and time-consuming in diagnosing clinically suspected SBP.

Prevention and management of gastroesophageal varices

Bleeding from gastroesophageal varices is a serious complication in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Although there has been significance improvement in the prognosis of variceal bleeding with advancement in diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for its management, mortality rate still remains high. Therefore, appropriate prevention and rapid, effective management of bleeding from gastroesophageal varices is very important. Recently, various studies about management of gastoesophageal varices, including prevention of development and aggravation of varices, prevention of first variceal bleeding, management of acute variceal bleeding, and prevention of variceal rebleeding, have been published. The present article reviews published articles and practice guidelines to present the most optimal management of patients with gastroesophageal varices.

Assessment of Haemodynamic Response to Nonselective Beta-Blockers in Portal Hypertension by Phase-Contrast Magnetic Resonance Angiography

A significant unmet need exists for accurate, reproducible, noninvasive diagnostic tools to assess and monitor portal hypertension (PHT). We report the first use of quantitative MRI markers for the haemodynamic assessment of nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) in PHT. In a randomized parallel feasibility study in 22 adult patients with PHT and a clinical indication for NSBB, we acquired haemodynamic data at baseline and after 4 weeks of NSBB (propranolol or carvedilol) using phase-contrast MR angiography (PC-MRA) in selected intra-abdominal vessels. T1 mapping of liver and spleen was undertaken to assess changes in tissue composition. Target NSBB dose was achieved in 82%. There was a substantial reduction from baseline in mean average flow in the superior abdominal aorta after 4 weeks of NSBB therapy (4.49 ± 0.98 versus 3.82 ± 0.86 L/min, P = 0.03) but there were no statistically significant differences in flow in any other vessels, even in patients with >25% decrease in heart rate (47% of patients). Mean percentage change in liver and spleen T1 following NSBB was small and highly variable. In conclusion, PC-MRA was able to detect reduction in cardiac output by NSBB but did not detect significant changes in visceral blood flow or T1. This trial was registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN98001632).

Hemodynamic response to primary prophylactic therapy with nonselective β-blockers is related to a reduction of first variceal bleeding risk in liver cirrhosis: a meta-analysis

The current primary prophylaxis for esophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients consists of nonselective β-blocker (NSBB) therapy. However, only approximately half of the patients achieve a sufficient hemodynamic response to NSBB therapy. Clinical application of hemodynamic response monitoring is still under debate. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the potential clinical value of monitoring the hemodynamic response to NSBB therapy using hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurements in the primary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the COCHRANE Library. Randomized-controlled trials and case series that included cirrhotic patients receiving primary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding with NSBBs and hemodynamic response monitoring using HVPG measurements were included for analysis. The primary outcome measure was variceal bleeding. A fixed-effect analysis was carried out using the Mantel-Haenszel method for relative risks. Six of the 1172 papers found were selected on the basis of stringent selection criteria. Hemodynamic response (HVPG ≤12 mmHg and/or a reduction of ≥20%, or ≥10% in one study, from baseline) to β-blocker therapy was associated significantly with a lower risk of variceal bleeding (relative risk=0.13, 95% confidence interval=0.06-0.29) compared with a nonresponse. Patients achieving a hemodynamic response to NSBB therapy have a lower risk of variceal bleeding than hemodynamic nonresponders. Hemodynamic monitoring in primary prophylaxis is of potential clinical value and requires further assessment in large cohort randomized-controlled trials.

Beta blockers and cirrhosis, 2016

To date, non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) are a cornerstone in the treatment of portal hypertension. During the last years, our understanding of the potential benefits of early initiation of NSBB treatment, their effects beyond the prevention of variceal bleeding (i.e., their non-hemodyamic effects), as well as potential detrimental effects in patients with advanced disease has continuously evolved. In addition, we have learned that not all NSBBs are equal. Due to its additional anti-α1-adrenergic activity, carvedilol has been shown to be more potent in decreasing portal pressure, but might lead to more pronounced decreases in systemic arterial pressure, when compared to conventional NSBBs. It might be particularly beneficial in 'early' portal hypertension, when potential detrimental effects on systemic hemodynamics are less critical. In contrast, there is increasing evidence that the use of carvedilol or high NSBB doses should be carefully scrutinized in patients with severe or refractory ascites. Our review summarizes the current knowledge on the use of NSBBs for preventing variceal bleeding and other decompensating events and provides guidance for their safe use in hemodynamically 'vulnerable' patient populations. Finally, we also highlight areas for further research.

Variceal Bleeding: Prophylaxis, Treatment, and Prevention

Variceal bleeding leads to significant morbidity and mortality in patients with portal hypertension. Mortality can be greater than 50% with the initial bleed and many patients develop recurrent bleeding with equal or greater mortality. Currently cirrhosis is the leading cause of portal hypertension, which is defined as a hepatic vein-portal vein gradient greater than 5 mmHg. Portal hypertension may arise from increased splanchnic blood flow due to systemic vasodilation that occurs in the hyperdynamic circulation of cirrhosis or from increased vascular resistance in intrahepatic and/or portocollateral vessels; by decreasing splanchnic blood flow, portal inflow decreases and so does portal pressure. Pharmacologic therapy consisting of nonselective β-blockers, vasopressin, and octreotide act by decreasing splanchnic blood flow, and long-acting nitrates may cause direct vasodilation of portocollateral vessels and/or decreased splanchnic blood flow. Nonselective β-blockers are the cornerstone of treatment for primary prophylaxis of bleeding, whereas vasopressin and octreotide are used for acute hemorrhaging. Two endoscopic modalities are available for control of acute bleeding and prevention of recurrent bleeding: sclerotherapy and endoscopic variceal ligation. After standard airway control and adequate fluid resuscitation, endoscopy helps localize the area of bleeding, and often in conjunction with vasopressin or octreotide can help control bleeding. Empiric antibiotics (fluoroquinolones or third-generation cephalosporins) should be started prior to endoscopy and early in the course of treatment. Sclerotherapy and band ligation along with nonselective β-blockers can help prevent recurrences of bleeding. For patients with bleeding gastric varices or uncontrollably bleeding esophageal varices, interventional radiologic procedures such as the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) can be used, and depending on the clinical condition and Child's classification of the patient, a surgically created portosystemic shunt may be appropriate treatment. Hopefully with emerging, new techniques and more widespread, prudent use of prophylactic drugs and endoscopy, the mortality and morbidity of variceal bleeding can be reduced.

Risk and Predictors of Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis Patients Receiving Primary Prophylaxis With Non-Selective Beta-Blockers

OBJECTIVES

Prior studies have demonstrated the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) in preventing first variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. However, little is known about the overall effectiveness of NSBB in routine clinical care.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of cirrhotic patients without prior bleeding who initiated a NSBB (propranolol, nadolol) at any Veterans Administration facility between 2008 and 2013. The primary outcome was variceal bleeding within 12 months. We conducted Cox-proportional hazards analyses to identify demographic, clinical, and NSBB-related (type of NSBB, mean dose, dose change, and heart rate response) factors associated with variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

Of 5,775 patients, 678 (11.7%) developed variceal bleeding. Mean daily dose of NSBB was <40 mg in 58.8%, 18.1% had either upward or downward titration in NSBB dose, and 9.8% had hemodynamic response. Patients who were younger, with ascites, greater medical comorbidity, and higher MELD (Model for end-stage liver disease) scores had a higher risk of variceal bleeding. Patients on a higher daily dose (>60 vs. <40 mg, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.81), who had either upward or downward dose titration (adjusted HR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.90 and 0.64; 95% CI 0.45-0.90, respectively), and those who achieved hemodynamic response (adjusted HR 0.75; 95% CI=0.57-1.0) had lower risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 12% of patients bled while being on NSBB for primary prophylaxis. A higher NSBB dose and dose titration were protective; yet most patients did not have the NSBB dose titrated to the recommended levels. Our data highlight the need for careful monitoring of cirrhotic patients on NSBB.

Development of hyperdynamic circulation and response to β-blockers in compensated cirrhosis with portal hypertension

Nonselective β-blockers are useful to prevent bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and large varices but not to prevent the development of varices in those with compensated cirrhosis and portal hypertension (PHT). This suggests that the evolutionary stage of PHT may influence the response to β-blockers. To characterize the hemodynamic profile of each stage of PHT in compensated cirrhosis and the response to β-blockers according to stage, we performed a prospective, multicenter (tertiary care setting), cross-sectional study. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and systemic hemodynamic were measured in 273 patients with compensated cirrhosis before and after intravenous propranolol (0.15 mg/kg): 194 patients had an HVPG ≥10 mm Hg (clinically significant PHT [CSPH]), with either no varices (n = 80) or small varices (n = 114), and 79 had an HVPG >5 and <10 mm Hg (subclinical PHT). Patients with CSPH had higher liver stiffness (P < 0.001), worse Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P < 0.001), more portosystemic collaterals (P = 0.01) and splenomegaly (P = 0.01) on ultrasound, and lower platelet count (P < 0.001) than those with subclinical PHT. Patients with CSPH had lower systemic vascular resistance (1336 ± 423 versus 1469 ± 335 dyne · s · cm(-5) , P < 0.05) and higher cardiac index (3.3 ± 0.9 versus 2.8 ± 0.4 L/min/m(2) , P < 0.01). After propranolol, the HVPG decreased significantly in both groups, although the reduction was greater in those with CSPH (-16 ± 12% versus -8 ± 9%, P < 0.01). The HVPG decreased ≥10% from baseline in 69% of patients with CSPH versus 35% with subclinical PHT (P < 0.001) and decreased ≥20% in 40% versus 13%, respectively (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with subclinical PHT have less hyperdynamic circulation and significantly lower portal pressure reduction after acute β-blockade than those with CSPH, suggesting that β-blockers are more suitable to prevent decompensation of cirrhosis in patients with CSPH than in earlier stages.

U.K. guidelines on the management of variceal haemorrhage in cirrhotic patients

These updated guidelines on the management of variceal haemorrhage have been commissioned by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee (CSSC) of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) under the auspices of the liver section of the BSG. The original guidelines which this document supersedes were written in 2000 and have undergone extensive revision by 13 members of the Guidelines Development Group (GDG). The GDG comprises elected members of the BSG liver section, representation from British Association for the Study of the Liver (BASL) and Liver QuEST, a nursing representative and a patient representative. The quality of evidence and grading of recommendations was appraised using the AGREE II tool.The nature of variceal haemorrhage in cirrhotic patients with its complex range of complications makes rigid guidelines inappropriate. These guidelines deal specifically with the management of varices in patients with cirrhosis under the following subheadings: (1) primary prophylaxis; (2) acute variceal haemorrhage; (3) secondary prophylaxis of variceal haemorrhage; and (4) gastric varices. They are not designed to deal with (1) the management of the underlying liver disease; (2) the management of variceal haemorrhage in children; or (3) variceal haemorrhage from other aetiological conditions.

Diagnosing bacterial peritonitis made easy by use of leukocyte esterase dipsticks

INTRODUCTION

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) requires rapid diagnosis for the initiation of antibiotics. Its diagnosis is usually based on manual examination of ascitic fluid (AF) having long reporting time. AF infection is diagnosed when the fluid polymorphonuclear leukocyte (PMNL) concentration ≥250 cells/mm(3).

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Aim was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of leukocyte esterase (LE) reagent strip for rapid diagnosis of SBP in patients who underwent abdominal paracentesis and to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was carried out on 103 patients with ascites. Cell count of AF as determined by colorimetric scale of Multistix 10 SG reagent strip was compared with counting chamber method (PMNL count ≥250 cells/mm(3) was considered positive).

RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS

Of the 103 patients SBP was diagnosed in 20 patients, 83 patients were negative for SBP by manual cell count. The sensitivity and specificity of the LE test for detecting neutrocytic SBP taking grade 2 as cut off were 95% and 96.4% respectively, with a positive predictive value of 86.4% and a negative predictive value of 98.8%. Diagnostic accuracy of LE test was 96.1%.

DISCUSSION

There was a good correlation between the reagent strip result and PMNL count. The LE strip test is based on the esterase activity of activated granulocytes which reacts with an ester-releasing hydroxyphenylpyrrole causing a colour change in the azo dye of reagent strip. It is a very sensitive and specific method for the prompt detection of elevated PMNL count, and represents a convenient, inexpensive, simple, and bedside method for diagnosis of SBP. A negative LE test result excludes SBP with a high degree of certainty.

Primary prevention of variceal bleeding: pharmacological therapy versus endoscopic banding

Variceal bleeding is one of the most feared complications in patients with liver cirrhosis. It continues to be a leading cause of death among patients with liver cirrhosis. Although its prognosis has improved over the last several decades, it still carries substantial mortality. Preventing variceal bleeding has been extensively studied and evaluated in several studies in the recent years and the comparison between the different modalities available to prevent variceal bleeding has been an area of discussion. Currently the two most widely used modalities to prevent variceal bleeding are pharmacologic (non-selective beta-blockers [NSBB]) and endoscopic (variceal band ligation [VBL]) which have replaced sclerotherapy in the recent years. In addition to NSBB and recent carvedilol, different other medications have been evaluated including isosorbide mononitrates, spironolactone and angiotensin blocking agents. Comparing the outcomes and adverse effects of these two modalities has been evaluated in different studies. Some studies have showed superiority of VBL until recently, when carvedilol has been included, however; overall mortality has been similar in most trials. Despite that, NSBB remain the first line treatment, as they are cheaper and relatively effective in preventing both esophageal and gastric bleeding. The following sections discuss the primary prevention of variceal bleeding with a focus on NSBB, carvedilol and VBL.

Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding

Primary prevention of variceal bleeding is an important and long-debated topic in the management of patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices. Prophylaxis is recommended for high-risk patients with small esophageal varices (advanced liver disease and/or presence of red wale marks) and those with medium/large varices. Nonselective β-blockers and endoscopic band ligation have been shown to be equally effective in primary prevention of variceal bleeding and are the only currently recommended therapies. Controversy still exists, however, regarding which one of these strategies is preferred. This article reviews the established recommendations and recent advances in the prevention of first esophageal variceal bleeding.

[Mexican consensus on portal hypertension]

The aim of the Mexican Consensus on Portal Hypertension was to develop documented guidelines to facilitate clinical practice when dealing with key events of the patient presenting with portal hypertension and variceal bleeding. The panel of experts was made up of Mexican gastroenterologists, hepatologists, and endoscopists, all distinguished professionals. The document analyzes themes of interest in the following modules: preprimary and primary prophylaxis, acute variceal hemorrhage, and secondary prophylaxis. The management of variceal bleeding has improved considerably in recent years. Current information indicates that the general management of the cirrhotic patient presenting with variceal bleeding should be carried out by a multidisciplinary team, with such an approach playing a major role in the final outcome. The combination of drug and endoscopic therapies is recommended for initial management; vasoactive drugs should be started as soon as variceal bleeding is suspected and maintained for 5 days. After the patient is stabilized, urgent diagnostic endoscopy should be carried out by a qualified endoscopist, who then performs the corresponding endoscopic variceal treatment. Antibiotic prophylaxis should be regarded as an integral part of treatment, started upon hospital admittance and continued for 5 days. If there is treatment failure, rescue therapies should be carried out immediately, taking into account that interventional radiology therapies are very effective in controlling refractory variceal bleeding. These guidelines have been developed for the purpose of achieving greater clinical efficacy and are based on the best evidence of portal hypertension that is presently available.

Nutritional status assessment in cirrhotic patients after protein supplementation

Background. Protein supplementation has been shown to be effective for the treatment of malnourished patients with liver cirrhosis. The parameters used to assess nutritional improvement in cirrhotic patients for such treatment are important. Objective. To evaluate the parameters for assessment of nutritional status in patients with liver cirrhosis after protein supplementation. Material and Method. A cross-sectional, prospective clinical trial with 22 cirrhotic patients was performed. Data from anthropometry, bioelectrical impedance, subjective global assessment (SGA), and visceral protein were gathered and analyzed to assess nutritional improvement after protein supplementation. Results. Twenty-two cirrhotic patients (mean age 52.9 ± 12.8 years; 54.5% male; 63.6% alcoholic cirrhosis; 63.6% Child-Pugh C) were recruited. After protein supplementation, a significant improvement was demonstrated in the SGA class A from 10 patients (45.5%) to 16 (72.7%) and 18 (81.8%) at the 4th and 8th weeks, respectively. Body weight, body mass index, and lean muscle mass were significantly increased from baseline at the 8th week. No significant change in other nutritional parameters was observed. Conclusions. The SGA and lean muscle mass were significant parameters in order to assess nutritional status in cirrhotic patients after protein supplementation.

Insulin resistance in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension

Insulin resistance (IR) is involved in the pathogenesis of endothelial dysfunction and is also present in patients with cirrhosis. Intrahepatic endothelial dysfunction plays a major role, increasing hepatic vascular resistance and promoting portal hypertension (PH). In addition, β-adrenergic agonists and insulin share several intracellular signaling pathways. Thus IR may influence the response to β-blockers. This study aimed at evaluating the relationship between IR and hepatic hemodynamics in patients with cirrhosis and with the portal pressure response to acute β-blockade. Forty-nine patients with cirrhosis and PH were included. Hepatic and systemic hemodynamics were measured, and IR was estimated by using the updated homeostasis model assessment (HOMA)-2 index. Patients with HOMA-2 > 2.4 were considered IR. In patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥ 10 mmHg) [clinically significant PH (CSPH)], hemodynamic measurements were performed again 20 min after intravenous propranolol. Mean HOMA-2 index was 3 ± 1.4. Fifty-seven percent of patients had IR. A weak correlation between HOMA-2 index and HVPG was observed. Eighty-six percent of patients had CSPH. HOMA-2 index was an independent predictor of CSPH. However, in patients with CSPH, the correlation between HOMA-2 index and HVPG was lost. HVPG, but not IR, predicted the presence of esophageal varices. Response to propranolol was not different between patients with or without IR. In nondiabetic patients with cirrhosis, HOMA-2 index is directly associated with the presence of CSPH and indirectly with varices, but does not allow either grading HVPG or predicting its response to propranolol.

Aliskiren reduces portal pressure in portal hypertensive rats

BACKGROUND

Aliskiren is a direct renin inhibitor used in the treatment for arterial hypertension. It can also augment nitric oxide (NO) production, which plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis of portal hypertension and modulation of porto-systemic collaterals. This study investigated the effects of aliskiren on portal pressure and porto-systemic collaterals of portal vein-ligated (PVL) rats.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sham-operated and PVL rats received aliskiren (50 mg/kg per day) or distilled water (control) treatment for 10 days. The mean arterial pressure and portal pressure were measured by catheterization of the right femoral artery and mesenteric vein, while the superior mesenteric arterial blood flow was measured by Doppler technique. The left adrenal vein and superior mesentery artery were dissected for mRNA study. The PVL rats also underwent preincubation with (i) Krebs solution (control); (ii) 10(-4) M aliskiren; or (iii) 10(-4) M aliskiren plus nonselective NO inhibitor N(ω)-nitro-L-arginine (10(-4) M), followed by the addition of arginine vasopressin (AVP) to evaluate the collateral vascular responsiveness.

RESULTS

Aliskiren had systemic arterial pressure- and portal pressure-lowering effects in PVL rats. Superior mesentery arterial resistance also decreased. The constitutive NO synthase was enhanced in the left adrenal vein and superior mesentery artery after aliskiren treatment. Aliskiren attenuated the collateral vasoconstrictive effects of AVP, but the vasodilatory effects were abolished after nonselective NO synthase inhibition.

CONCLUSIONS

Chronic aliskiren use reduces portal pressure in portal hypertensive rats partly due to the modulation of splanchnic and collateral NO synthase.

Meta-analysis: beta-blockers versus banding ligation for primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding

AIM

To perform an updated meta-analysis comparing β-blockers (BB) with endoscopic variceal banding ligation (EVBL) in the primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Randomized controlled trials were identified through electronic databases, article reference lists and conference proceedings. Analysis was performed using both fixed-effect and random-effect models. Heterogeneity and publication bias were systematically taken into account. Main outcomes were variceal bleeding rates and all-cause mortality, calculated overall and at 6, 12, 18 and 24 months.

RESULTS

19 randomized controlled trials were analyzed including a total of 1,483 patients. Overall bleeding rates were significantly lower for the EVBL group: odds ratio (OR) 2.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.55-2.73], p < 0.0001, without evidence of publication bias. Bleeding rates were also significantly lower at 18 months (OR 2.20, 95% CI [1.04-4.60], P = 0.04), but publication bias was detected. When only high quality trials were taken into account, results for bleeding rates were no longer significant. No significant difference was found for either bleeding-related mortality or for all-cause mortality overall or at 6, 12, 18 or 24 months. BB were associated with more frequent severe adverse events (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.60-4.40, P < 0.0001) whereas fatal adverse events were more frequent with EVBL (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.99, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

EVBL appears to be superior to BB in preventing the first variceal bleed, although this finding may be biased as it was not confirmed by high quality trials. No difference was found for mortality. Current evidence is insufficient to recommend EVBL over BB as first-line therapy.

Carvedilol or propranolol in portal hypertension? A randomized comparison

OBJECTIVES

Carvedilol is a non-selective β-blocker with intrinsic anti-α(1)-adrenergic activity, potentially more effective than propranolol in reducing hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). We compared the long-term effect of carvedilol and propranolol on HVPG and assessed whether the acute response to oral propranolol predicted the long-term HVPG response on either drug.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

HVPG was measured in 38 patients with cirrhosis and HVPG ≥ 12 mm Hg at baseline and then again 90 min after an oral dose of 80 mg propranolol. Patients were double-blinded randomized to either carvedilol (21 patients) or propranolol (17 patients) and after 90 days of treatment HVPG measurements were repeated.

RESULTS

HVPG decreased by 19.3 ± 16.1% (p < 0.01) and by 12.5 ± 16.7% (p < 0.01) in the carvedilol and propranolol groups, respectively, with no significant difference between treatment regimens (p = 0.21). Although insignificant, an acute decrease in HVPG of ≥12% was the best cut-off value to predict long-term HVPG response to propranolol when using ROC curve analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized study showed that carvedilol is at least as effective as propranolol on HVPG after long-term administration. Furthermore, a predictive value of an acute propranolol test on HVPG could not be confirmed.

Comparison of endothelin receptors in normal versus cirrhotic human liver and in the liver from endothelial cell-specific ETB knockout mice

AIMS

Endothelin (ET) antagonists show promise in animal models of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. The aim was to pharmacologically characterise the expression of endothelin receptors in human liver, hepatic artery and portal vein.

MAIN METHODS

Immunofluorescence staining, receptor autoradiography and competition binding assays were used to localise and quantify ET receptors on hepatic parenchyma, hepatic artery and portal vein in human cirrhotic or normal liver. Additional experiments were performed to determine the affinity and selectivity of ET antagonists for liver ET endothelin receptors. An endothelial cell ET(B) knockout murine model was used to examine the function of sinusoid endothelial ET(B) receptors.

KEY FINDINGS

ET(B) receptors predominated in normal human liver and displayed the highest ratio (ET(B):ET(A) 63:47) compared with other peripheral tissues. In two patients examined, liver ET(B) expression was up-regulated in cirrhosis (ET(B):ET(A) 83:17). Both sub-types localised to the media of normal portal vein but ET(B) receptors were downregulated fivefold in the media of cirrhotic portal vein. Sinusoid diameter was fourfold smaller in endothelial cell ET(B) knockout mice. The liver morphology of ET(B) knockout mice was markedly different to normal murine liver, with loss of the wide spread sinusoidal pattern. In the knockout mice, sinusoids were reduced in both number and absolute diameter, while large intrahepatic veins were congested with red blood cells.

SIGNIFICANCE

These data support a role for the ET system in cirrhosis of the liver and suggest that endothelial ET(B) blockade may cause sinusoidal constriction which may contribute to hepatotoxicity associated with some endothelin antagonists.

Pathophysiology of portal hypertension and its clinical links

Portal hypertension is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. Intrahepatic vascular resistance due to architectural distortion and intrahepatic vasoconstriction, increased portal blood flow due to splanchnic vasodilatation, and development of collateral circulation have been considered as major factors for the development of portal hypertension. Recently, sinusoidal remodeling and angiogenesis have been focused as potential etiologic factors and various researchers have tried to improve portal hypertension by modulating these new targets. This article reviews potential new treatments in the context of portal hypertension pathophysiology concepts.

Managing varices: drugs, bands, and shunts

Drugs, bands, and shunts have all been used in the treatment of varices and variceal hemorrhage and have resulted in improved outcomes. However, the specific use of each of these therapies depends on the setting (primary or secondary prophylaxis, treatment of AVH) and on patient characteristics. The indications for each are summarized in Table 4.

Propranolol modulates the collateral vascular responsiveness to vasopressin via a Gα-mediated pathway in portal hypertensive rats

Gastro-oesophageal variceal haemorrhage is one of the most dreadful complications of portal hypertension and can be controlled with vasoconstrictors. Nevertheless, sympathetic tone abnormality and vascular hyporesponsiveness in portal hypertension may impede the haemostatic effects of vasoconstrictors. Propranolol, a β-blocker binding the G-protein-coupled adrenoceptor, is a portal hypotensive agent. However, whether propranolol influences the collateral vasoresponse is unknown. Portal hypertension was induced by PVL (portal vein ligation) in Sprague–Dawley rats. In an acute study with an in situ perfusion model, the collateral responsiveness to AVP (arginine vasopressin) was evaluated with vehicle, propranolol (10 μmol/l), propranolol plus suramin (100 μmol/l, a Gα inhibitor) or suramin pre-incubation. Gα mRNA expression in the splenorenal shunt, the most prominent intra-abdominal collateral vessel, was measured. In the chronic study, rats received DW (distilled water) or propranolol (10 mg·kg−1 of body weight·day−1) for 9 days. Then the concentration–response relationship of AVP and Gα mRNA expression were assessed. Propranolol pre-incubation elevated the perfusion pressure changes of collaterals in response to AVP, which was inhibited by suramin. The splenorenal shunt Gαq and Gα11 mRNA expression were enhanced by propranolol. The group treated with propranolol plus suramin had a down-regulation of Gα11 as compared with the propranolol group. Chronic propranolol treatment reduced mean arterial pressure, PP (portal pressure) and the perfusion pressure changes of collaterals to AVP. Gαs expression was up-regulated. In conclusion, propranolol pre-incubation enhanced the portal-systemic collateral AVP responsiveness in portal hypertensive rats, which was related to Gαq and Gα11 up-regulation. In contrast, the attenuated AVP responsiveness by chronic propranolol treatment was related to Gαs up-regulation. The Gα signalling pathway may be a therapeutic target to control variceal bleeding and PP in portal hypertension.

Primary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage in children with portal hypertension: a framework for future research

Nonselective β-blocker therapy and endoscopic variceal ligation reduce the incidence of variceal hemorrhage in cirrhotic adults, but their use in children is controversial. There are no evidence-based recommendations for the prophylactic management of children at risk of variceal hemorrhage due to the lack of appropriate randomized controlled trials. In a recent gathering of experts at the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases annual meeting, significant challenges were identified in attempting to design and implement a clinical trial of primary prophylaxis in children using either of these therapies. These challenges render such a trial unfeasible, primarily due to the large sample size required, inadequate knowledge of appropriate dosing of β-blockers, and difficulty in recruiting to a trial of endoscopic variceal ligation. Pediatric research should focus on addressing questions of natural history and diagnosis of varices, prediction of variceal bleeding, optimal approaches to β-blocker and ligation therapy, and alternative study designs to explore therapeutic efficacy in children.

Clinical pharmacology of portal hypertension

Portal hypertension is an increase in pressure in the portal vein and its tributaries. It is defined as a portal pressure gradient (the difference in pressure between the portal vein and the hepatic veins) greater than 5 mm Hg. Although this gradient defines portal hypertension, a gradient of 10 mm Hg or greater defines clinically significant portal hypertension, because this pressure gradient predicts the development of varices, decompensation of cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The most direct consequence of portal hypertension is the development of gastroesophageal varices that may rupture and lead to the development of variceal hemorrhage. This article reviews the pathophysiologic bases of the different pharmacologic treatments for portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis and places them in the context of the natural history of varices and variceal hemorrhage.

Overview of the methods and therapies for the primary prevention of variceal bleeding

Patients with cirrhosis develop varices at a rate of 5% per year, and a third of patients with high-risk varices will bleed. The mortality associated with variceal haemorrhage is typically 20%, and still exceeds that of myocardial infarction. Current options to prevent the first variceal bleed include noncardioselective beta-blockers or variceal band ligation. In patients with medium-to-large esophageal varices, both therapies reduce the risk of bleeding by 50% or more. The choice of therapy should take into account patient choice and local availability; although for most patients drug therapy is the preferred first-line treatment. There has been recent interest in carvedilol, with promising initial data. Further studies are necessary before universal recommendation. There is no role for drug therapy in patients without varices, and the use of beta-blockers for patients with small varices is controversial.

Controlled trial of ligation plus nadolol versus nadolol alone for the prevention of first variceal bleeding

Both nadolol and ligation have proved to be effective in the prophylaxis of first variceal bleeding. This study was conducted to evaluate the effects and safety of combining nadolol with ligation. Cirrhotic patients with high-risk esophageal varices but without a bleeding history were considered for enrolment. Eligible patients were randomized to receive band ligation plus nadolol (Combined group, 70 patients) or nadolol alone (Nadolol group, 70 patients). In the Combined group multiligators were applied. Patients received regular ligation treatment at an interval of 4 weeks until variceal obliteration. Nadolol was administered at a dose to reduce 25% of the pulse rate in both the Combined group and the Nadolol group. Both groups were comparable in baseline data. In the Combined group 50 patients (71%) achieved variceal obliteration. The mean dose of nadolol was 52 +/- 16 mg in the Combined group and 56 +/- 19 mg in the Nadolol group. During a median follow-up of 26 months, 18 patients (26%) in the Combined group and 13 patients (18%) in the Nadolol group experienced upper gastrointestinal bleeding (P = NS). Esophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 10 patients (14%) in the Combined group and nine patients (13%) in the Nadolol group (P = NS). Adverse events were noted in 48 patients (68%) in the Combined group and 28 patients (40%) in the Nadolol group (P = 0.06). Sixteen patients in each group died.

CONCLUSION

The addition of ligation to nadolol may increase adverse events and did not enhance effectiveness in the prophylaxis of first variceal bleeding.

Acute and chronic hemodynamic changes after propranolol in patients with cirrhosis under primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding: a pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Prophylactic treatment of variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients with beta-blockers is effective in only some patients. Our aim was to determine whether the response of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) to the intravenous administration of propranolol predicts the response after chronic oral propranolol treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included prospectively cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices under primary prophylaxis (PP) and secondary prophylaxis (SP). The HVPG was measured at baseline and after a propranolol bolus (0.15 mg/kg intravenous). A patient was considered a good-responder if HVPG decreased to 12 mmHg or 20% from baseline. Patients then received oral propranolol (heart rate titrated). Poor-responders under SP were also included in a variceal band ligation program. After at least 3 months, a second hemodynamic study was conducted.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were included (36 SP and 20 PP). Response rate was similar (32.1 and 41.9%, P=0.7) and the Pearson's correlation coefficient was 0.61 (P=0.001). In 81.4% patients, the first study predicted the response status of the second. Six patients rebled on follow-up between the studies, all of them were poor responders to intravenous propranolol.

CONCLUSION

A single hemodynamic study using intravenous propranolol seems to predict chronic response to propranolol.

Endoscopic variceal ligation for primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal hemorrhage in pre-liver transplant patients

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is widely used to prevent esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with advanced cirrhosis. However, the safety and efficacy of EVL in this setting have not been clearly established. This study included 300 adult patients with cirrhosis on our liver transplant waitlist who underwent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Esophageal varices deemed to be at high risk of bleeding were banded until eradication or transplantation. A retrospective review of patient notes and endoscopy databases was undertaken, and the number of banding episodes, complications, and patient outcomes were recorded. Forty-two of 300 patients presented with or had previous variceal bleeding prior to referral and were excluded from the analysis. Of the remaining 258 patients, 101 underwent a total of 259 banding episodes (2.6 per patient) with a median follow-up post-banding of 18.4 months per patient (a total of 150 patient years). Failed prophylaxis occurred in 2 patients (2%), and there were 3 episodes (1.2%) of acute hematemesis from band-induced ulceration. One patient (1%) had mild esophageal stricturing post-banding without dysphagia. Four of 36 patients (11%) previously found to have moderately sized or larger varices that were not banded presented with hematemesis due to variceal bleeding and were subsequently banded. None of the patients that received banding died because of bleeding or failed to receive a transplant as a result of banding complications. This study shows that in liver transplant candidates, EVL is highly effective in preventing first variceal bleed. Although banding carries a small risk of band-induced bleeding, this rate is low in comparison with the predicted rate of variceal bleeding in this population.

Prognostic value of acute hemodynamic response to i.v. propranolol in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Cirrhotic patients chronically treated with beta-blockers who achieve a decrease of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) > or =20% from baseline or to < or =12 mmHg have a marked reduction of first bleeding or re-bleeding. However, two HVPG measurements are needed to evaluate response. This study was aimed at investigating the predictive role of acute HVPG response to i.v. propranolol for bleeding and survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 166 cirrhotic patients with varices with HVPG response to i.v. propranolol (0.15 mg/kg). All patients subsequently received non-selective beta-blockers to prevent first bleeding (n=78) or re-bleeding (n=88).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients developed a portal hypertension-related bleeding over 2 years of follow-up. Decrease (12%) in HVPG was the best cut-off for bleeding risk discrimination. This parameter was used to classify patients in responders (n=95) and non-responders (n=71). In primary prophylaxis (54 responders vs. 24 non-responders) the actuarial probability of bleeding was half in responders than in non-responders (12% vs. 23% at 2 years; ns). In secondary prophylaxis (41 responders vs. 47 non-responders) a good hemodynamic response was also significantly and independently associated with a 50% decrease in the probability of re-bleeding (23% at 2 years vs. 46% in non-responders; p=0.032) and a better survival (95% vs. 65%; p=0.003).

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of acute HVPG response to i.v. propranolol before initiating secondary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding is a useful tool in predicting the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers. If adequately validated, this might be a more cost-effective strategy than the chronic evaluation of HVPG response and might be useful to guide therapeutic decisions in these patients.

Acute hemodynamic response to beta-blockers and prediction of long-term outcome in primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Studies of variceal bleeding have shown that a hemodynamic response to treatment of portal hypertension is appropriate when the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) decreases below 12 mmHg or by > 20% from baseline. However, in primary prophylaxis, many nonresponders do not bleed and 2 invasive procedures are needed to assess response. We investigated the long-term prognostic value of an acute response to beta-blockers and whether the target reduction in HVPG can be improved in primary prophylaxis.

METHODS

An initial hemodynamic study was performed in patients with large varices and without previous bleeding. After baseline measurements were made, propranolol was administered intravenously and measurements were repeated 20 minutes later. Patients were given nadolol daily and a second hemodynamic study was performed.

RESULTS

Of 105 patients, 15% had variceal bleeding. Using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, a decrease of HVPG > or = 10% was the best value to predict bleeding. In the initial study, 75 patients (71%) were responders (HVPG decreased to < or = 12 mmHg or by > or = 10%) and had a lower probability of first bleeding than nonresponders (4% vs 46% at 24 months; P < .001). Acute responders also had a lower risk of developing ascites (P = .001). Chronic responders had a lower probability of bleeding than nonresponders (P < .001). There was a correlation between acute and chronic changes in HVPG (r = 0.62; P = .01).

CONCLUSION

The acute hemodynamic response to beta-blockers can be used to predict the long-term risk of first bleeding. An HVPG reduction > 10% from baseline is the best target to define response in primary prophylaxis.

Management and treatment of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension: recommendations from the Department of Veterans Affairs Hepatitis C Resource Center Program and the National Hepatitis C Program

Cirrhosis represents the end stage of any chronic liver disease. Hepatitis C and alcohol are currently the main causes of cirrhosis in the United States. Although initially cirrhosis is compensated, it eventually becomes decompensated, as defined by the presence of ascites, variceal hemorrhage, encephalopathy, and/or jaundice. These management recommendations are divided according to the status, compensated or decompensated, of the cirrhotic patient, with a separate section for the screening, diagnosis, and management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), as this applies to patients with both compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. In the compensated patient, the main objective is to prevent variceal hemorrhage and any practice that could lead to decompensation. In the decompensated patient, acute variceal hemorrhage and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis are severe complications that require hospitalization. Hepatorenal syndrome is also a severe complication of cirrhosis but one that usually occurs in patients who are already in the hospital and, as it represents an extreme of the hemodynamic alterations that lead to ascites formation, it is placed under treatment of ascites. Recent advances in the pathophysiology of the complications of cirrhosis have allowed for a more rational management of cirrhosis and also for the stratification of patients into different risk groups that require different management. These recommendations are based on evidence in the literature, mainly from randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses of these trials. When few or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and consensus conferences with involvement of recognized experts. A rational management of cirrhosis will result in improvements in quality of life, treatment adherence, and, ultimately, in outcomes.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient: worth another look?

Portal hypertension is one of the most important complications of chronic liver disease and accounts for significant morbidity and mortality. Measurement of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is a simple, invasive, and reproducible method of assessing portal venous pressure. Measurement of HVPG provides the clinician an estimate of the degree of intrahepatic portal flow resistance, guides therapy for variceal bleeding (primary and secondary prophylaxis), assesses feasibility of resection in patients with hepatocellular cancer, and predicts response to therapy of patients with chronic hepatitis C. Achieving hemodynamic targets of reducing the HVPG to <10 mmHg or a 20% reduction from baseline virtually eliminates complications related to portal hypertension from chronic liver disease. This review explores the role of HVPG measurement in the contemporary treatment of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

Efficacy of β-adrenergic blocker plus 5-isosorbide mononitrate and endoscopic band ligation for prophylaxis of esophageal variceal rebleeding: A meta-analysis

AIM: To systematically assess the efficacy and safety of β-adrenergic blocker plus 5-isosorbide mononitrate (BB + ISMN) and endoscopic band ligation (EBL) on prophylaxis of esophageal variceal rebleeding.

METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of BB + ISMN and EBL on prophylaxis of esophageal variceal rebleeding were gathered from Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trial Registry and China Biological Medicine database between January 1980 and August 2007. Data from five trials were extracted and pooled. The analyses of the available data using the Revman 4.2 software were based on the intention-to-treat principle.

RESULTS: Four RCTs met the inclusion criteria. In comparison with BB + ISMN with EBL in prophylaxis of esophageal variceal rebleeding, there was no significant difference in the rate of rebleeding [relative risk (RR), 0.79; 95% CI: 0.62-1.00; P = 0.05], bleeding-related mortality (RR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.31-1.42; P = 0.40), overall mortality (RR, 0.81; 95% CI: 0.61-1.08; P = 0.15) and complications (RR, 1.26; 95% CI: 0.93-1.70; P = 0.13).

CONCLUSION: In the prevention of esophageal variceal rebleeding, BB + ISMN are as effective as EBL. There are few complications with the two treatment modalities. Both BB + ISMN and EBL would be considered as the first-line therapy in the prevention of esophageal variceal rebleeding.

Is the rapid virologic response a positive predictive factor of sustained virologic response in all pretreatment status genotype 1 hepatitis c patients treated with peginterferon-alpha2b and ribavirin?

INTRODUCTION

Currently it is not yet defined if the rapid virologic response (RVR) can predict a sustained virologic response (SVR) in relapsers and nonresponders.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate treatment-RVR as a predictive factor of SVR in genotype 1 hepatitis C treatment naive, relapsers, and nonresponder patients treated with pegylated interferon-alpha (PEG-IFN-alpha2b) and ribavirin.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-seven genotype 1 hepatitis C patients who were treated with PEG-IFN-alpha2b and ribavirin and had SVR assessed were included. Hepatitis C virus RNA analysis at the fourth week of treatment was performed in all patients. The exclusion criteria were hepatitis B virus and/or HIV co-infection. A comparative analysis was performed between the groups with and without RVR and a logistic regression model was applied.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-seven patients were analyzed, 103 (62%) were naives, 22 (13%) relapsers, and 42 (25%) nonresponders. The SVR rates were 44% in naives, 68% in relapsers, and 12% in nonresponders. RVR was attained in 51/167 (31%) patients and in this group the SVR was higher than in those without RVR (75% vs. 23%; P<0.001). This difference was also observed in all subgroups: naives (71% vs. 29%; P=0.001), relapsers (92% vs. 40%; P=0.02), and nonresponders (50% vs. 8%; P=0.06). A stepwise logistic regression model identified RVR and absence of cirrhosis as the factors independently associated to SVR.

CONCLUSIONS

RVR and absence of cirrhosis are the strongest predictive factors of SVR in HCV genotype 1 patients. Assessment of RVR is very useful in all pretreatment status patients in predicting SVR and provides information for individualizing therapy.

Clinical trial: a randomized controlled study on prevention of variceal rebleeding comparing nadolol + ligation vs. hepatic venous pressure gradient-guided pharmacological therapy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) monitoring of therapy to prevent variceal rebleeding provides strong prognostic information. Treatment of nonresponders to beta-blockers +/- nitrates has not been clarified.

AIM

To assess the value of HVPG-guided therapy using nadolol + prazosin in nonresponders to nadolol + isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN) compared with a control group treated with nadolol + ligation.

METHODS

Cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding were randomized to HVPG-guided therapy (n = 30) or nadolol + ligation (n = 29). A Baseline haemodynamic study was performed and repeated within 1 month. In the guided-therapy group, nonresponders to nadolol + ISMN received nadolol and carefully titrated prazosin and had a third haemodynamic study.

RESULTS

Nadolol + prazosin decreased HVPG in nonresponders to nadolol + ISMN (P < 0.001). Finally, 74% of patients were responders in the guided-therapy group vs. 32% in the nadolol + ligation group (P < 0.01). The probability of rebleeding was lower in responders than in nonresponders in the guided therapy group (P < 0.01), but not in the nadolol + ligation group (P = 0.41). In all, 57% of nonresponders rebled in the guided-therapy group and 20% in the nadolol + ligation group (P = 0.05). The incidence of complications was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients treated to prevent variceal rebleeding, the association of nadolol and prazosin effectively rescued nonresponders to nadolol and ISMN, improving the haemodynamic response observed in controls receiving nadolol and endoscopic variceal ligation. Our results also suggest that ligation may rescue nonresponders.

Portal hypertension: pre-primary and primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding

In liver cirrhosis, variceal bleeding is the last in a chain of events initiated by the increase in portal pressure (estimated in clinical practice by the hepatic venous pressure gradient). When hepatic venous pressure gradient goes above 10 mmHg the patient is at risk of developing varices, and when hepatic venous pressure gradient reaches 12 mmHg variceal bleeding might develop. Currently, there is not any effective therapy for the prevention of the development of varices. When varices are small, beta-adrenergic blockers might prevent the enlargement of the varices, and may reduce the risk of variceal bleeding. In patients with medium to large varices, beta-blockers are clearly effective in reducing the risk of variceal bleeding. Endoscopic band ligation might be more effective than beta-blockers, but available evidence is still very weak.