Flumazenil in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in children with fulminant liver failure

Flumazenil versus placebo or no intervention for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy is a common complication of cirrhosis which results in poor brain functioning. The spectrum of changes associated with hepatic encephalopathy ranges from the clinically 'indiscernible' or minimal hepatic encephalopathy to the clinically 'obvious' or overt hepatic encephalopathy. Flumazenil is a synthetic benzodiazepine antagonist with high affinity for the central benzodiazepine recognition site. Flumazenil may benefit people with hepatic encephalopathy through an indirect negative allosteric modulatory effect on gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor function. The previous version of this review, which included 13 randomised clinical trials, found no effect of flumazenil on all-cause mortality, based on an analysis of 10 randomised clinical trials, but found a beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy, based on an analysis of eight randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of flumazenil versus placebo or no intervention for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and LILACS; meeting and conference proceedings; and bibliographies in May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials regardless of publication status, blinding, or language in the analyses of benefits and harms, and observational studies in the assessment of harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently. We undertook meta-analyses and presented results using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and I2 values as a marker of heterogeneity. We assessed bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains; determined the quality of the evidence using GRADE; evaluated the risk of small-study effects in regression analyses; and conducted trial sequential, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 eligible randomised clinical trials with 867 participants, the majority of whom had an acute episode of overt hepatic encephalopathy. In addition, we identified one ongoing randomised clinical trial. We were unable to gather outcome data from two randomised clinical trials with 25 participants. Thus, our analyses include 842 participants from 12 randomised clinical trials comparing flumazenil versus placebo. We classified one randomised clinical trial at low risk of bias in the overall assessment and the remaining randomised clinical trials at high risk of bias. The duration of follow-up ranged from a few minutes to two weeks, but it was less than one day in the majority of the trials.In total, 32/433 (7.4%) participants allocated to flumazenil versus 38/409 (9.3%) participants allocated to placebo died (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; 11 randomised clinical trials; low quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis and the one randomised clinical trial assessed as low risk of bias (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.53) found no beneficial or harmful effects of flumazenil on all-cause mortality. The methods used to evaluate hepatic encephalopathy included several different clinical scales, electrophysiological variables, and psychometric tests. Flumazenil was associated with a beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy when including all randomised clinical trials (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.80; 824 participants; nine randomised clinical trials; low quality evidence), or just the trial at low risk of bias (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.84; 527 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis supported a beneficial effect of flumazenil on hepatic encephalopathy. The randomised clinical trials included little information about causes of death and little information on non-fatal serious adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low quality evidence suggesting a short-term beneficial effect of flumazenil on hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis, but no evidence of an effect on all-cause mortality. Additional evidence from large, high quality randomised clinical trials is needed to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of flumazenil in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

Flumazenil versus placebo or no intervention for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy is a common complication of cirrhosis which results in poor brain functioning. The spectrum of changes associated with hepatic encephalopathy ranges from the clinically 'indiscernible' or minimal hepatic encephalopathy to the clinically 'obvious' or overt hepatic encephalopathy. Flumazenil is a synthetic benzodiazepine antagonist with high affinity for the central benzodiazepine recognition site. Flumazenil may benefit people with hepatic encephalopathy through an indirect negative allosteric modulatory effect on gamma-aminobutyric acid receptor function. The previous version of this review, which included 13 randomised clinical trials, found no effect of flumazenil on all-cause mortality, based on an analysis of 10 randomised clinical trials, but found a beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy, based on an analysis of eight randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of flumazenil versus placebo or no intervention for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and LILACS; meeting and conference proceedings; and bibliographies in May 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials regardless of publication status, blinding, or language in the analyses of benefits and harms, and observational studies in the assessment of harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors extracted data independently. We undertook meta-analyses and presented results using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and I2 values as a marker of heterogeneity. We assessed bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains; determined the quality of the evidence using GRADE; evaluated the risk of small-study effects in regression analyses; and conducted trial sequential, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 14 eligible randomised clinical trials with 867 participants, the majority of whom had an acute episode of overt hepatic encephalopathy. In addition, we identified one ongoing randomised clinical trial. We were unable to gather outcome data from 2 randomised clinical trials with 25 participants. Thus, our analyses include 842 participants from 12 randomised clinical trials comparing flumazenil versus placebo. We classified one randomised clinical trial at low risk of bias in the overall assessment and the remaining randomised clinical trials at high risk of bias. The duration of follow-up ranged from a few minutes to two weeks, but it was less than one day in the majority of the trials.In total, 32/433 (7.4%) participants allocated to flumazenil versus 38/409 (9.3%) participants allocated to placebo died (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16; 11 randomised clinical trials; low quality evidence). The Trial Sequential Analysis and the one randomised clinical trial assessed as low risk of bias (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.53) found no beneficial or harmful effects of flumazenil on all-cause mortality. The methods used to evaluate hepatic encephalopathy included several different clinical scales, electrophysiological variables, and psychometric tests. Flumazenil was associated with a beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy when including all randomised clinical trials (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.80; 824 participants; 9 randomised clinical trials; low quality evidence), or just the trial at low risk of bias (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.84; 527 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis supported a beneficial effect of flumazenil on hepatic encephalopathy. The randomised clinical trials included little information about causes of death and little information on non-fatal serious adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low quality evidence suggesting a short-term beneficial effect of flumazenil on hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis, but no evidence of an effect on all-cause mortality. Additional evidence from large, high quality randomised clinical trials is needed to evaluate the potential benefits and harms of flumazenil in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

Finasteride improves motor, EEG, and cellular changes in rat brain in thioacetamide-induced hepatic encephalopathy

Neurosteroids are involved in the pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy (HE). This study evaluated the effects of finasteride, inhibitor of neurosteroid synthesis, on motor, EEG, and cellular changes in rat brain in thioacetamide-induced HE. Male Wistar rats were divided into the following groups: 1) control; 2) thioacetamide-treated group, TAA (300 mg·kg(-1)·day(-1)); 3) finasteride-treated group, FIN (50 mg·kg(-1)·day(-1)); and 4) group treated with FIN and TAA (FIN + TAA). Daily doses of TAA and FIN were administered in three subsequent days intraperitoneally, and in the FIN + TAA group FIN was administered 2 h before every dose of TAA. Motor and reflex activity was determined at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 24 h, whereas EEG activity was registered about 24 h after treatment. The expressions of neuronal (NeuN), astrocytic [glial fibrilary acidic protein (GFAP)], microglial (Iba1), and oligodendrocyte (myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein) marker were determined 24 h after treatment. While TAA decreased all tests, FIN pretreatment (FIN + TAA) significantly improved equilibrium, placement test, auditory startle, head shake reflex, motor activity, and exploratory behavior vs. the TAA group. Vital reflexes (withdrawal, grasping, righting and corneal reflex) together with mean EEG voltage were significantly higher (P < 0.01) in the FIN + TAA vs. the TAA group. Hippocampal NeuN expression was significantly lower in TAA vs. control (P < 0.05). Cortical Iba1 expression was significantly higher in experimental groups vs. control (P < 0.05), whereas hippocampal GFAP expression was increased in TAA and decreased in the FIN + TAA group vs. control (P < 0.05). Finasteride improves motor and EEG changes in TAA-induced HE and completely prevents the development of hepatic coma.

GABAergic neurosteroids: the "endogenous benzodiazepines" of acute liver failure

Acute liver failure (ALF) or fulminant hepatic failure represents a serious life-threatening condition. ALF is characterized by a significant liver injury that leads to a rapid onset of hepatic encephalopathy (HE). In ALF, patients manifest rapid deterioration in consciousness leading to hepatic coma together with an onset of brain edema which induces high intracranial pressure that frequently leads to herniation and death. It is well accepted that hyperammonemia is a cardinal, but not the sole, mediator in the pathophysiology of ALF. There is increasing evidence that neurosteroids, including the parent neurosteroid pregnenolone, and the progesterone metabolites tetrahydroprogesterone (allopregnanolone) and tetrahydrodeoxycorticosterone (THDOC) accumulate in brain in experimental models of ALF. Neurosteroids in ALF represent good candidates to explain the phenomenon of "increased GABAergic tone" in chronic and ALF, and the beneficial effects of benzodiazepine drugs. The mechanisms that trigger brain neurosteroid changes in ALF are not yet well known, but could involve partially de novo neurosteroidogenesis following activation of the translocator protein (TSPO). The factors that contribute to TSPO changes in ALF may include ammonia and cytokines. It is possible that increases in brain levels of neurosteroids in ALF may result in auto-regulatory mechanisms where hypothermia may play a significant role. Possible mechanisms that may involve neurosteroids in the pathophysiology of HE, and more speculatively in brain edema, and inflammatory processes in ALF are suggested.

Benzodiazepine receptor antagonists for hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy may be associated with accumulation of substances that bind to a receptor-complex in the brain resulting in neural inhibition. Benzodiazepine receptor antagonists may have a beneficial effect on patients with hepatic encephalopathy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of benzodiazepine receptor antagonists for patients with hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Eligible trials were identified through The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE and EMBASE (last search: January 2004), reference lists of relevant articles, authors of trials, and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing any benzodiazepine receptor antagonist versus placebo or no intervention for hepatic encephalopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently included trials and extracted data. Binary outcomes are reported as risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on a random effects model. Statistical heterogeneity was explored by a chi-squared test with significance set at P < 0.1. The inconsistency across trials was assessed by I(2). Potential sources of heterogeneity were explored through subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen randomised trials with 805 patients were included. Eight trials used a crossover design. All trials were double-blind and assessed flumazenil versus placebo. Data on all outcomes could not be extracted from all trials. The included patients had a favourable prognosis (361/390 [93%] survived in the flumazenil group versus 345/376 [92%] in the placebo group). Flumazenil had a significant beneficial effect on improvement of hepatic encephalopathy at the end of treatment (RD 0.28; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.37, eight trials). Flumazenil had no significant effect on recovery (RD 0.13; 95% CI -0.09 to 0.36, two trials) or mortality RD 0.01; 95% CI -0.05 to 0.07, 10 trials). Flumazenil may be associated with adverse events, but trial results were heterogeneous.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Flumazenil had a significant beneficial effect on short-term improvement of hepatic encephalopathy in patients with cirrhosis and a highly favourable prognosis. Flumazenil had no significant effect on recovery or survival. Considering the fluctuating nature of hepatic encephalopathy, future trials should use a parallel design and assess if treatment with flumazenil leads to a sustained improvement or increased recovery and survival. Until this has been demonstrated, flumazenil may be considered for patients with chronic liver disease and hepatic encephalopathy, but cannot be recommended for routine clinical use.

Effects of benzodiazepines on triphasic waves: implications for nonconvulsive status epilepticus

Nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) is often diagnosed based on abolition of rhythmic sharp waves by benzodiazepines. It is possible that sharp waves resulting from metabolic (nonepileptic) encephalopathies may also respond to benzodiazepines and are potentially misdiagnosed as NCSE. The authors hypothesized that triphasic waves (TW) resulting from metabolic encephalopathy are abolished by benzodiazepines. They retrospectively identified patients with TW resulting from metabolic encephalopathy who had EEG recordings before, during, and after benzodiazepine administration. Benzodiazepines were given either because of the possibility of NCSE or for a medically indicated purpose. All patients were diagnosed definitively with a metabolic cause of encephalopathy and not NCSE. Ten patients (mean age, 59 years) met the criteria and were reviewed. TW resolved persistently in four patients and intermittently in six patients. Background activity slowed in five patients and was attenuated in five patients. Unresponsive patients did not arouse and three of five drowsy patients became less responsive. Rhythmic sharp waves resulting from metabolic encephalopathy are abolished by benzodiazepines, similar to NCSE, but without improvement in mental status. This suggests that definitive electrographic diagnosis of primary NCSE should not be based entirely on abolition of sharp waves by benzodiazepines. This also implies that gamma-aminobutyric acid neurotransmission is important in the expression of TW.

Benzodiazepine receptor antagonists for acute and chronic hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

The pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy is unknown. It has been suggested that liver failure leads to the accumulation of substances that bind to a receptor-complex in the brain resulting in neural inhibition which may progress to coma. Several trials have assessed benzodiazepine receptor antagonists for hepatic encephalopathy, but the results are conflicting.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of benzodiazepine receptor antagonists for patients with acute or chronic hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Eligible trials were identified through The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists of relevant articles, authors of trials, and the pharmaceutical company known to produce benzodiazepine receptor antagonists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing any benzodiazepine receptor antagonist versus placebo or no intervention for hepatic encephalopathy were included, regardless of language or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial inclusion and data extraction were made independently by two contributors. Depending on the presence or absence of significant heterogeneity (P<0.1) a random or fixed effect model was used. Potential causes for heterogeneity were explored by sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve randomised trials with 765 patients were included. Eight trials used a crossover design. All trials were double-blind and assessed flumazenil versus placebo. Data on all outcomes could not be extracted from all trials. The included patients had a favourable prognosis (341/370 (92%) survived in the flumazenil group versus 325/356 (91%) in the placebo group). Flumazenil had no significant effect on full recovery (two trials), survival (nine trials), or on the occurrence of adverse events (five trials). However, flumazenil was associated with a significant effect on improvement of hepatic encephalopathy compared to placebo at the end of treatment (103/346 (30%) versus 23/332 (7 %), risk difference 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.28, five trials).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Flumazenil had no significant effect on recovery or survival from hepatic encephalopathy. However, flumazenil had a significant effect on short-term improvement of hepatic encephalopathy in some patients with chronic liver disease and a highly favourable prognosis. Considering the fluctuating nature of hepatic encephalopathy, future trials should use a parallel design and assess if treatment with flumazenil leads to a sustained improvement or increased recovery and survival. Until this has been demonstrated, flumazenil may be considered for patients with chronic liver disease and hepatic encephalopathy, but cannot be recommended for routine clinical use.

Overview of extracorporeal liver support systems and clinical results

Patients with acute liver failure (ALF) continue to have an almost 50% mortality rate despite improvements associated with the use of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT). Numerous ex vivo methods have been developed in attempts to improve patient survival. These methods can be divided into three groups: detoxification (e.g., dialysis, charcoal adsorption, plasma exchange), which only provides excretory function; ex vivo liver perfusion (e.g., whole organ or tissue perfusion), which provides some metabolic function; and bioartificial or cell-based systems, which combine elements of the first two methods. Clinical trials have shown minimal efficacy of the various detoxification methods in terms of ALF patient survival, while the relative success of OLT has shown the importance of providing metabolic as well as excretory functions. Attempts to provide those additional functions with ex vivo tissue perfusion have been fraught with complications such as clotting and acute tissue rejection, leading to the conceptual development of cell-based bioreactor systems. A number of these bioartificial systems have been clinically evaluated, and the preliminary patient survival rates have encouraged further work in this area.