Nonselective β-Blockers and Survival in Patients With Cirrhosis and Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

NON-SELECTIVE BETA-BLOCKERS IN CIRRHOTIC PATIENTS WITH REFRACTORY ASCITES: WHERE ARE WE?

BACKGROUND

The established use of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) in the primary and secondary prevention of esophageal varices has recently been questioned in the subgroup of patients with diuretic-refractory ascites.

OBJECTIVE

Critically analyze the body of evidence on the topic in order to assist clinical decisions.

METHODS

A literature review was carried out in the Pubmed® and Scielo® databases. In total, 20 articles between 2010 and 2023 were read by independent researchers.

CONCLUSION

It remains doubtful whether the use of NSBB is deleterious in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites, however our literature review allows us to conclude that these drugs should not be proscribed in these patients. On the contrary, a doctor-patient decision based on tolerability and hemodynamic parameters certainly seems to be a safe conduct.

Beta-blockers and cirrhosis: Striking the right balance

Decompensated cirrhosis is associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality. Variceal hemorrhage (VH) further increases the risk of mortality, and of future variceal bleed events. Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) are effective therapy for primary and secondary prophylaxis of VH and have become the cornerstone of pharmacologic therapy in cirrhosis. Beta-blockers are associated with reduced overall mortality and GI-bleeding related mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis; they may also confer hemodynamically independent beneficial effects. Long-term treatment with beta-blockers may improve decompensation-free survival in compensated cirrhosis with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). Carvedilol more effectively lowers the hepatic vein portal gradient than traditional NSBBs and has been shown to improve survival in compensated cirrhosis. Treatment goals in compensated cirrhosis with CSPH should focus on early utilization of beta-blockers to prevent decompensation and reduce mortality.

Effect of beta-blockers on multiple haemodynamics in cirrhosis: A cross-over study by MR-imaging and hepatic vein catheterization

BACKGROUND

Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) are widely used in the treatment of patients with cirrhosis. Only about 50% respond with a sufficient reduction in their hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and NSBB may induce detrimental cardiac and renal effects in the presence of severe decompensation. We aimed to assess the effects of NSBB on haemodynamics using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to assess if these haemodynamic changes were related to the disease severity and HVPG response.

METHOD

A prospective cross-over study of 39 patients with cirrhosis. Patients underwent hepatic vein catheterization and MRI with assessments of HVPG, cardiac function, systemic and splanchnic haemodynamics before and after propranolol infusion.

RESULTS

Propranolol induced significant decreases in cardiac output (-12%) and blood flow of all vascular compartments, with the largest reductions seen in the azygos venous (-28%), portal venous (-21%), splenic (-19%) and superior mesenteric artery (-16%) blood flow. Renal artery blood flow fell by -5% in the total cohort, with a more pronounced reduction in patients without ascites than in those with ascites (-8% vs. -3%, p = .01). Twenty-four patients were NSBB responders. Their changes in HVPG after NSBB were not significantly associated with other haemodynamic changes.

CONCLUSION

The changes in cardiac, systemic and splanchnic haemodynamics did not differ between NSBB responders and non-responders. The effects of acute NSBB blockade on renal flow seem to depend on the severity of the hyperdynamic state, with the largest reduction in renal blood flow in compensated patients compared to decompensated patients with cirrhosis. However, future studies are needed to assess the effects of NSBB on haemodynamics and renal blood flow in patients with diuretic-resistant ascites.

Nonselective beta-blockers may lead to stage 2 acute kidney injury and waitlist mortality in child class C cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) protect patients with compensated cirrhosis; however, it is unclear if NSBB is associated with acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. We aimed to determine if the use of NSBB was associated with an increased risk of stage II AKI or greater and waitlist mortality (WLM) among patients with decompensated cirrhosis awaiting liver transplant stratified by cirrhosis severity.

METHODS

Included were 1816 outpatients listed for liver transplantation at UCSF from June 2012 to April 2022. Our primary outcome was stage 2 AKI (>200% increase in serum creatinine). Our secondary outcome was WLM (all-cause mortality). Our primary exposure was the use of any NSBB derived using natural language processing of clinical notes. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models with time-dependent variables were used to determine the HR of NSBB use on stage 2 AKI and WLM, stratified by Child-Pugh Score.

RESULTS

The average age of the cohort was 58 years old, with 35% identifying as female. In multivariable time-dependent models, NSBB use was associated with 1.53 × (95 CI 1.19-1.97) the hazard of stage 2 AKI in the cohort overall and 1.80 × (95 CI 1.26-2.57) among those with Child C cirrhosis, respectively. Similarly, NSBB use was associated with 1.30 × (95 CI 1.07-1.59) and 1.45 × (95 CI 1.03-2.03) the hazard of WLM, overall and in Child C, respectively. NSBB use was not significantly associated with AKI nor WLM among those with Child A.

CONCLUSION

NSBB use is associated with Stage 2 AKI and WLM in patients awaiting liver transplantation and Child C cirrhosis. These data suggest cautious use of NSBBs in patients in this population.

Update in the Treatment of the Complications of Cirrhosis

Cirrhosis consists of 2 main stages: compensated and decompensated, the latter defined by the development/presence of ascites, variceal hemorrhage, and hepatic encephalopathy. The survival rate is entirely different, depending on the stage. Treatment with nonselective β-blockers prevents decompensation in patients with clinically significant portal hypertension, changing the previous paradigm based on the presence of varices. In patients with acute variceal hemorrhage at high risk of failure with standard treatment (defined as those with a Child-Pugh score of 10-13 or those with a Child-Pugh score of 8-9 with active bleeding at endoscopy), a pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) improves the mortality rate and has become the standard of care in many centers. In patients with bleeding from gastrofundal varices, retrograde transvenous obliteration (in those with a gastrorenal shunt) and/or variceal cyanoacrylate injection have emerged as alternatives to TIPS. In patients with ascites, emerging evidence suggests that TIPS might be used earlier, before strict criteria for refractory ascites are met. Long-term albumin use is under assessment for improving the prognosis of patients with uncomplicated ascites and confirmatory studies are ongoing. Hepatorenal syndrome is the least common cause of acute kidney injury in cirrhosis, and first-line treatment is the combination of terlipressin and albumin. Hepatic encephalopathy has a profound impact on the quality of life of patients with cirrhosis. Lactulose and rifaximin are first- and second-line treatments for hepatic encephalopathy, respectively. Newer therapies such as L-ornithine L-aspartate and albumin require further assessment.

Use of non-selective B-blockers is safe in hospitalised decompensated cirrhosis patients and exerts a potential anti-inflammatory effect: Data from the ATTIRE trial

BACKGROUND

Nonselective B-blockers (NSBBs) are believed to have pleiotropic effects beyond reducing portal pressure. However, studies also report potential harm in patients hospitalized with cirrhosis and ascites. We therefore investigated whether NSBB use at ATTIRE trial entry (Albumin to prevent infection in chronic liver failure, 2016-19) was associated with increased renal or cardiovascular dysfunction, compared the incidence of infection and plasma markers of systemic inflammation, and examined mortality at 28-days, 3 and 6-months.

METHODS

In ATTIRE patients grouped by NSBB use at trial entry, we studied infection at baseline, hospital acquired infection and organ dysfunction during trial treatment period and mortality, with propensity score matching to account for differences in disease severity.

FINDINGS

There were no differences in renal or cardiovascular dysfunction between patients treated with NSBBs or not, during days 3-15 of hospitalization, despite elevated serum creatinine in NSBB patients at hospitalisation. Use of NSBBs was associated with a significant reduction in infection at hospitalization (p = 0.006), lower white cell counts throughout hospital stay (p < 0.001) and reduced plasma procalcitonin (p = 0.009) and interlukin-8 levels (p = 0.04) at baseline, but markers of bacterial translocation and systemic inflammation were the same in treatment groups. There was no reduction in hospital acquired infections in patients taking NSBBs and no beneficial impact on mortality at 28-days, 3 and 6-months.

INTERPRETATIONS

Our real-world data from a completed randomised trial show that use of NSBBs in decompensated cirrhosis patients is safe during hospitalisation. We also show a potential anti-inflammatory role for NSBBs which may be mediated by a downregulation of IL-8 induced leucocytosis, that was associated with reduced infection at baseline but not a survival benefit.

FUNDING

Wellcome Trust and Department of Health and Social Care.

Current and investigational drugs in early clinical development for portal hypertension

Introduction

The development of portal hypertension leads to a majority of complications associated with chronic liver disease. Therefore, adequate treatment of portal hypertension is crucial in the management of such patients. Current treatment options are limited and consist mainly of medications that decrease the hyperdynamic circulation, such as non-selective beta blockers, and treatment of hypervolemia with diuretics. Despite these options, mortality rates have not improved over the last two decades. Newer, more effective treatment options are necessary to help improve survival and quality of life in these patients.

Areas covered

Multiple preclinical models and clinical studies have demonstrated potential efficacy of a variety of new treatment modalities. We introduce treatment options including the use of vasodilation promotors, vasoconstriction inhibitors, anticoagulants, antiangiogenics, and anti-inflammatory drugs. We examine the most recent studies for treatment options within these drug classes and offer insights as to which show the most promise in this field.

Methodology

Published studies that identified novel medical treatment options of portal hypertension were searched using PubMed (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). Clinical trials listed in Clinicaltrials.gov were also searched with a focus on more recent and ongoing studies, including those with completed recruitment. Searching with key terms including "portal hypertension" as well as individually searching specific treatment medications that were listed in other publications was carried out. Finally, current societal guidelines and recent review articles relevant to the management of portal hypertension were evaluated, and listed references of interest were included.

Conclusion

Many ongoing early phase studies demonstrate promising results and may shape the field of portal hypertension management in future. As concrete results become available, larger RCTs will be required before making definitive conclusions regarding safety and efficacy and whether or not they can be incorporated into routine clinical practice. Statins, anticoagulants, and PDE inhibitors have been among the most studied and appear to be most promising.

Mastering Core Recommendations during HEPAtology ROUNDS in Patients with Advanced Chronic Liver Disease

Efficient and thorough care of hospitalized patients with advanced chronic liver disease is of utter importance to improve outcomes and optimize quality of life. This requires understanding current evidence and best practices. To facilitate focus on up-to-date knowledge and a practical approach, we have created the HEPA-ROUNDS mnemonic while outlining a practical review of the literature with critical appraisal for the busy clinician. The HEPA-ROUNDS mnemonic provides a structured approach that incorporates critical concepts in terms of prevention, management, and prognostication of the most common complications frequently encountered in patients with advanced chronic liver disease. In addition, implementing the HEPA-ROUNDS mnemonic can facilitate education for trainees and staff caring for patients with advanced chronic liver disease.

Non-selective beta-blockers in patients with ascites: The complex interplay among the liver, kidney and heart

Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) are the cornerstone of the primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients. They additionally prevent ascites development and death in compensated patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. After ascites onset, NSBBs remain beneficial for preventing further decompensations. However, as the cirrhosis progresses, the inflammation increases, systemic vasodilatation worsens, ascites turns refractory and cardiodynamic equilibrium becomes extremely fragile. In this scenario, NSBBs can critically impair the cardiac reserve and facilitate a haemodynamic breakdown, imperilling renal perfusion. Consequently, NSBB treatment should be carefully monitored or even avoided in such patients, and other options for portal hypertension management should be considered. In the present review, we explore the effects of NSBBs in patients with ascites and discuss the complex interplay among their hepatic, systemic and renal haemodynamic effects in this scenario.

Nonselective Beta-Blockers in Portal Hypertension: Why, When, and How?

Content available: Author Interview and Audio Recording.

Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis: A comparison of different strategies

Patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices bleed at a yearly rate of 5%-15%, and, when variceal hemorrhage develops, mortality reaches 20%. Patients are deemed at high risk of bleeding when they present with medium or large-sized varices, when they have red signs on varices of any size and when they are classified as Child-Pugh C and have varices of any size. In order to avoid variceal bleeding and death, individuals with cirrhosis at high risk of bleeding must undergo primary prophylaxis, for which currently recommended strategies are the use of traditional non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) (i.e., propranolol or nadolol), carvedilol (a NSBB with additional alpha-adrenergic blocking effect) or endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). The superiority of one of these alternatives over the others is controversial. While EVL might be superior to pharmacological therapy regarding the prevention of the first bleeding episode, either traditional NSBBs or carvedilol seem to play a more prominent role in mortality reduction, probably due to their capacity of preventing other complications of cirrhosis through the decrease in portal hypertension. A sequential strategy, in which patients unresponsive to pharmacological therapy would be submitted to endoscopic treatment, or the combination of pharmacological and endoscopic strategies might be beneficial and deserve further investigation.

Prevention of Cirrhosis Complications: Looking for Potential Disease Modifying Agents

The current therapeutic strategies for the management of patients with cirrhosis rely on the prevention or treatment of specific complications. The removal of the causative agents (i.e., viruses or alcohol) prevents decompensation in the vast majority of patients with compensated cirrhosis. In contrast, even when etiological treatment has been effective, a significant proportion of patients with decompensated cirrhosis remains at risk of further disease progression. Therefore, therapies targeting specific key points in the complex pathophysiological cascade of decompensated cirrhosis could represent a new approach for the management of these severely ill patients. Some of the interventions currently employed for treating or preventing specific complications of cirrhosis or used in other diseases (i.e., poorly absorbable oral antibiotics, statins, albumin) have been proposed as potential disease-modifying agents in cirrhosis (DMAC) since clinical studies have shown their capacity of improving survival. Additional multicenter, large randomized clinical trials are awaited to confirm these promising results. Finally, new drugs able to antagonize key pathophysiological mechanisms are under pre-clinical development or at the initial stages of clinical assessment.

Recent Advances in the Management of Acute Variceal Hemorrhage

Gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the most relevant causes of death in patients with cirrhosis and clinically significant portal hypertension, with gastroesophageal varices being the most frequent source of hemorrhage. Despite survival has improved thanks to the standardization on medical treatment aiming to decrease portal hypertension and prevent infections, mortality remains significant. In this review, our goal is to discuss the most recent advances in the management of esophageal variceal hemorrhage in cirrhosis with specific attention to the treatment algorithms involving the use of indirect measurement of portal pressure (HVPG) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), which aim to further reduce mortality in high-risk patients after acute variceal hemorrhage and in the setting of secondary prophylaxis.

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and extraperitoneal infections in patients with cirrhosis

Infections are a frequent complication and a major cause of death among patients with cirrhosis. The important impact of infections in general and especially spontaneous bacterial peritonitis on the course of disease and prognosis of patients with cirrhosis has been recognized for many years. Nevertheless, such importance has recently increased due to the comprehension of infection as one of the most prominent risk factors for patients to develop acute-on-chronic liver failure. Furthermore, the issue of infections in cirrhosis is a focus of increasing attention because of the spreading of multidrug resistant bacteria, which is an emerging concern among physicians assisting patients with cirrhosis. In the present paper, we will review the current epidemiology of infections in patients with cirrhosis and particularly that of infections caused by resistant bacteria, demonstrating the relevance of the subject. Besides, we will discuss the current recommendations on diagnosis and treatment of different kinds of infections, including spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and we will highlight the importance of knowing local microbiological profiles and choosing empirical antibiotic therapy wisely. Finally, we will debate the existing evidences regarding the role of volume expansion with albumin in patients with cirrhosis and extraperitoneal infections, and that of antibiotic prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis.

Nonselective beta-blockers are associated with a lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma among cirrhotic patients in the United States

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated an association between nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) and lower risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhosis. However, there has been no population-based study investigating the risk of HCC among cirrhotic patients treated using carvedilol.

AIMS

To determine the risk of HCC among cirrhotic patients with NSBBs including carvedilol.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study utilised the Cerner Health Facts database in the United States from 2000 to 2017. Kaplan-Meier estimate, Cox proportional hazards regression, and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to test the HCC risk among the carvedilol, nadolol, and propranolol groups compared with no beta-blocker group.

RESULTS

The final cohort comprised 107 428 eligible patients. The 100-month cumulative HCC incidence of NSBBs was significantly lower than the no beta-blocker group (carvedilol (11.24%) vs no beta-blocker (15.69%), nadolol (27.55%) vs no beta-blocker (32.11%), and propranolol (26.17%) vs no beta-blocker (28.84%) (P values < 0.0001). NSBBs were associated with a significantly lower risk of HCC (Hazard ratio: carvedilol 0.61 (95% CI 0.51-0.73), nadolol 0.74 (95% CI 0.63-0.87), propranolol 0.75 (95% CI 0.66-0.84) after PSM in the multivariate cox analysis. In subgroup analysis, NSBBs reduced the risk of HCC in cirrhosis with complications and non-alcoholic cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

NSBBs, including carvedilol, were associated with a significantly decreased risk of HCC in patients with cirrhosis when compared with no beta-blocker regardless of complications status. Future randomised-controlled studies comparing the incidence of HCC among NSBBs should elucidate which NSBB would be the best option to prevent HCC in cirrhosis.

β-blockers in advanced cirrhosis: More friend than enemy

Nonselective beta-adrenergic blocker (NSBB) therapy for the prevention of initial and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding in cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices has been used for the past four decades. NSBB therapy is considered the cornerstone of treatment for varices, and has become the standard of care. However, a 2010 study from the group that pioneered β-blocker therapy suggested a detrimental effect of NSBBs in decompensated cirrhosis, especially in patients with refractory ascites. Since then, numerous additional studies have incompletely resolved whether NSBBs are deleterious, although more recent evidence weighs against a harmful effect. The possibility of a "therapeutic window" has also been raised. We aimed to review the literature to analyze the pros and cons of using NSBBs in patients with cirrhosis, not only with respect to bleeding or mortality but also to other potential benefits and risks. β-blockers are highly effective in preventing first bleeding and recurrent bleeding. Furthermore, NSBBs improve congestion/ischemia of the gut mucosa, decrease intestinal permeability, and therefore indirectly alleviate systemic inflammation. β-blockers shorten the electrocardiographic prolonged QTc interval and may also decrease the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma. On the other hand, the possibility of deleterious effects in cirrhosis has not been completely eliminated. NSBBs may be associated with an increased risk of portal vein thrombosis, although this could be correlational artifact. Overall, we conclude that β-blockers in cirrhosis are much more of a friend than enemy.

Prevention of Variceal Bleeding and Rebleeding by Nonselective Beta-Blockers: A Tailored Approach

Nonselective beta-blockers represent the mainstay of medical therapy in the prophylaxis of variceal bleeding and rebleeding in patients with portal hypertension. Their efficacy has been demonstrated by numerous trials; however, there exist safety concerns in advanced disease, such as in patients with refractory ascites. Importantly, nonselective beta-blockers also exert nonhemodynamic beneficial effects that may contribute to a prolonged decompensation-free survival, as recently shown in the PREDESCI trial. This review summarizes the current evidence on nonselective beta-blocker therapy and proposes a tailored, patient-centered approach for the use of nonselective beta-blockers in patients with portal hypertension.

Evidence-based protocol for diagnosis and treatment of hepatorenal syndrome is independently associated with lower mortality

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is the deadliest complication of cirrhosis. The purpose of this study is to analyze if the use of a protocol for HRS is associated with higher survival in these patients.

METHODS

An evidence-based protocol for the diagnosis and treatment of HRS was instituted in 2013. Data from medical records from 2010 to 2016 were obtained by searching the hospital database for patients who received terlipressin, in the three years before and after the institution of the protocol. Data were reviewed to confirm the diagnosis of HRS and multiple variables were collected. Liver-specific scores were calculated and a stepwise Cox regression approach was used for univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 46 patients, 20 from the pre-protocol period and 26 from the post-protocol period. Respectively, mortality at 30 days, 90 days and 365 days was 75%, 75% and 90% for the pre-protocol period, and 61%, 69% and 80% for the post-protocol period. In the multivariate analysis, an aspartate aminotransferase (AST) of <40U/L, the pre-protocol period and higher Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores were associated with higher 30-day and 90-day mortality. The total mean dose of terlipressin and human albumin used per patient was reduced from 27mg to 22mg and from 236g to 144g, respectively, after the institution of the protocol. This was not associated with higher mortality.

CONCLUSION

The use of an evidence-based protocol for the treatment of HRS translated into a higher survival. The authors suggest that the use of evidence-based protocols for the diagnosis and treatment of HRS could reduce cost and mortality in tertiary hospitals.

Keeping Patients with End-Stage Liver Disease Alive While Awaiting Transplant: Management of Complications of Portal Hypertension

Complications of portal hypertension such as gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage, ascites, and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, as well as pulmonary complications, are often responsible for diminished quality of life, excess morbidity and mortality, increased health care resource use and expenditure, and dropout from the liver transplant (LT) waiting list. Therefore, the care of LT candidates on the waiting list must be centered on anticipation and prompt intervention for these complications.

Guidelines on the management of ascites in cirrhosis

The British Society of Gastroenterology in collaboration with British Association for the Study of the Liver has prepared this document. The aim of this guideline is to review and summarise the evidence that guides clinical diagnosis and management of ascites in patients with cirrhosis. Substantial advances have been made in this area since the publication of the last guideline in 2007. These guidelines are based on a comprehensive literature search and comprise systematic reviews in the key areas, including the diagnostic tests, diuretic use, therapeutic paracentesis, use of albumin, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and beta-blockers in patients with ascites. Where recent systematic reviews and meta-analysis are available, these have been updated with additional studies. In addition, the results of prospective and retrospective studies, evidence obtained from expert committee reports and, in some instances, reports from case series have been included. Where possible, judgement has been made on the quality of information used to generate the guidelines and the specific recommendations have been made according to the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)' system. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians, and it is expected that these guidelines will be revised in 3 years' time.

Precision medicine in variceal bleeding: Are we there yet?

Variceal bleeding is one of the most feared complications of portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis because of its deleterious impact on prognosis. Adequate management of patients at risk of developing variceal bleeding includes the prevention of the first episode of variceal bleeding and rebleeding, and is crucial in modifying prognosis. The presence of clinically significant portal hypertension is the main factor determining the risk of development of varices and other liver-related decompensations; therefore, it should be carefully screened for and monitored. Treating patients with clinically significant portal hypertension based on their individual risk of portal hypertension-related bleeding undoubtedly improves prognosis. The evaluation of liver haemodynamics and liver function can stratify patients according to their risk of bleeding and are no question useful tools to guide therapy in an individualised manner. That said, recent data support the idea that tailoring therapy to patient characteristics may effectively impact on prognosis and increase survival in all clinical scenarios. This review will focus on evaluating the available evidence supporting the use of individual risk characteristics for clinical decision-making and their impact on clinical outcome and survival. In primary prophylaxis, identification and treatment of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension improves decompensation-free survival. In the setting of acute variceal bleeding, the risk of failure and rebleeding can be easily predicted, allowing for early escalation of treatment (i.e. pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt) which can improve survival in appropriate candidates. Stratifying the risk of recurrent variceal bleeding based on liver function and haemodynamic response to non-selective beta-blockers allows for tailored treatment, thereby increasing survival and avoiding adverse events.

Impact of cardiac function, refractory ascites and beta blockers on the outcome of patients with cirrhosis listed for liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Whether non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) are deleterious in patients with end-stage cirrhosis and refractory ascites has been widely debated. We hypothesized that only the subset of patients on the liver transplant waiting list who had impaired cardiac performance would be at increased risk of mortality if receiving NSBBs.

METHODS

This study included 584 consecutive patients with cirrhosis evaluated for transplantation between 1999 and 2014. All patients had right heart catheterization with hemodynamic measurements at evaluation. Fifty percent received NSBBs. Refractory ascites was present in 33%. Cardiac performance was assessed by left ventricular stroke work index (LVSWI). Waiting list mortality without liver transplantation was explored using competing risk analysis.

RESULTS

LVSWI was significantly lower in patients with refractory ascites. In multivariate analysis using competing risk, refractory ascites, NSBBs and LVSWI were associated with waiting list mortality in the whole population, with a statistically significant interaction between NSBBs and LVSWI. The most discriminant value of LVSWI was 64.1 g-m/m². In the final model, refractory ascites (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.52; 95% CI1.01-2.28; p = 0.0083) and treatment by NSBBs with LVSWI <64.1 g-m/m² (subdistribution hazard ratio 1.96; 95% CI 1.32-2.90; p = 0.0009) were significantly associated with waiting list mortality, taking into account serum sodium and the model for end-stage liver disease score.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that compromised cardiac performance is more common in patients with refractory ascites and that NSBBs are deleterious in cirrhotic patients with compromised cardiac performance. These results highlight the prognostic value of cardiac function in patients with end-stage cirrhosis.

LAY SUMMARY

There are still controversies concerning the impact of non-selective beta blockers on outcomes in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, especially in those with refractory ascites. In this study of 584 cirrhotic patients evaluated for liver transplantation, who underwent right heart catheterization, we have shown that global cardiac performance measured by left ventricular stroke work index is lower in patients with refractory ascites. Administration of non-selective beta blockers in patients with compromised cardiac performance may increase waiting list mortality. These results highlight the prognostic value of global cardiac performance in patients with end-stage 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.

What's new in portal hypertension?

Portal hypertension is defined as increased pressure in the portal venous system. The most common cause of portal hypertension is cirrhosis. In this setting, there is an increase in intrahepatic resistance leading to an increase in portal pressure. By increasing portal blood flow, splanchnic vasodilation further aggravates portal hypertension. New pathogenic pathways are being established which might result in new therapeutic strategies. The presence of varices at endoscopy and/or other abdominal portosystemic collaterals confirms the diagnosis of portal hypertension. The role of non-invasive and imaging tests in the diagnosis and prognosis of portal hypertension has been clarified. Non-selective beta-blockers decrease both the risk of variceal haemorrhage and hepatic decompensation. Terlipressin, somatostatin or octreotide, in combination with early endoscopic therapy, are recommended for the treatment of acute variceal haemorrhage. Early Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is effective as salvage therapy in acute variceal bleeding in selected patients and prevents rebleeding more effectively than endoscopic and medical therapy resulting in an increased survival.

Non-selective beta blocker use is associated with improved short-term survival in patients with cirrhosis referred for liver transplantation

Background

Recent evidence cautions against the use of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) in patients with refractory ascites or spontaneous bacterial peritonitis while other data suggests a survival benefit in patients with advanced liver disease. The aim of this study was to describe the use and impact of NSBB in patients with cirrhosis referred for liver transplantation.

Methods

A single-center cohort of patients with cirrhosis, who were referred and evaluated for liver transplantation between January and June 2012 were studied for baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes. Patients were grouped according to the use of NSBB at initial evaluation, with the endpoint of 90-day mortality.

Results

Sixty-five (38%) of 170 consecutive patients evaluated for liver transplantation were taking NSBB. Patients taking NSBB had higher MELD and Child Pugh score. NSBB use was associated with lower 90-day mortality (6% vs. 15%) with a risk adjusted hazard ratio of 0.27 (95%CI .09–0.88, p = .03). Patients taking NSBB developed acute kidney injury (AKI) within 90 days more frequently than patients not taking NSBB (22% vs 11%), p = 0.048). However, this was related to increased stage 1 AKI episodes, all of which resolved. Twelve (27%) of 45 patients with > 90 day follow up discontinued NSBB, most commonly for hypotension and AKI, had increased subsequent MELD and mortality.

Conclusions

NSBB use in patients with cirrhosis undergoing liver transplant evaluation is associated with better short-term survival. Nevertheless, ongoing tolerance of NSBB in this population is dynamic and may select a subset of patients with better hemodynamic reserve.

The Role of Non-Selective β-Blockers in Compensated Cirrhotic Patients without Major Complications

Background and Objectives: Non-selective β-blockers (NSBB) could prevent decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH), but remained uncertain for compensated cirrhotic patients without major complications. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between propranolol users and non-users of a CC group without major complications. Material and Methods: We conducted this population-based cohort study by using the Taiwanese Longitudinal Health Insurance Database 2000. Propranolol users (classified as cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD)) and non-PPL users were matched with a 1:1 propensity score in both cohorts. Results: This study comprised 6896 propranolol users and 6896 non-propranolol users. There was no significant impact on the development of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis between the two groups (aHR: 1.24, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88~1.75; p = 0.2111). Male gender, aged condition, and non-liver related diseases (peripheral vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, dementia, pulmonary disease, and renal disease) were the independent risk factors of mortality. PPL users had significantly lower incidence of HCC development than non-users (aHR: 0.81, p = 0.0580; aHR: 0.80, p = 0.1588; and aHR: 0.49, p < 0.0001 in the groups of 1–28, 29–90, and >90 cDDD, respectively). Conclusion: The current study suggested that high cumulative doses of propranolol could decrease the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma among compensated cirrhotic patients without major complications. Further large-scale prospective studies are still required to confirm the findings in this study. Results: It remained uncertain whether non-selective β-blockers (NSBB) could prevent decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in compensatory cirrhotic patients without major complications. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between propranolol users and non-users of the CC group without major complications.

Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1: Current Challenges And Future Prospects

Renal dysfunction represents a dreadful complication of advanced liver cirrhosis. In addition to the traditional types of acute kidney injury (AKI) that can occur in the general population, cirrhotics might experience a different kind of renal dysfunction, called hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). The exact definition of HRS is a functional renal dysfunction caused by overactivity of the endogenous vasoactive systems (in particular intrarenal circulation) which lead to reduced renal perfusion. Type I HRS (HRS-1) is characterized by an abrupt deterioration in renal function (in less than 2 weeks), defined by a doubling of baseline sCr to >2.5 mg/dL or a 50% reduction in the initial 24 hrs creatinine clearance to <20 mL/min. Frequent precipitating events leading to HRS-1 are bacterial infections, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or large-volume paracentesis without adequate albumin administration as well as massive diuretic use. In 2015, the international club of ascites (ICA) revised the definitions and recommendations concerning HRS. The revised definition allows to adopt effective pharmacological therapy based on albumin and vasoconstrictors in an earlier stage thus not influenced anymore by a rigid sCr cut-off value as by the previous definition of HRS-1. The aim of this article was to provide an updated overview of the latest advancements in the field of hepatorenal syndrome and of the recent amendments of the previous definitions of kidney injury in cirrhotic patients.

Effect of Nonselective β-Blockers on Mortality in Patients With End-Stage Cirrhosis

Background: Data regarding safety of nonselective β-blockers (NSBBs) in patients with end-stage cirrhosis are conflicting, making it difficult for practitioners to justify if benefits outweigh the risks. Objective: Evaluate the effect of NSBB use on mortality in patients with end-stage cirrhosis. Methods: We performed a dual-center retrospective study of patients who received octreotide for a variceal bleed. Patients were stratified into 2 groups based on whether or not a NSBB was prescribed at hospital discharge. The primary outcome was 24-month mortality. Multivariable logistic regression, with 24-month mortality as the dependent variable, was performed to identify independent risk factors for the primary outcome. Results: 255 patients met inclusion criteria; 24-month mortality was 32.8%. The NSBB and no-NSBB groups had similar mortality rates at 24 months (32.0% vs 38.5%, P = 0.51). Mortality at 3 months (11.6% vs 23.3%, P = 0.08) and 12 months (22.2% vs 30.0%, P = 0.36) were similar, and there were no differences in rate of variceal bleeding (22.7% vs 13.3%, P = 0.34) or cirrhosis-related cause of death (20.4% vs 23.3%, P = 0.81). In the multivariable model, age, model for end-stage liver disease with sodium and hepatocellular carcinoma were independent risk factors for 24-month mortality. NSBB therapy had no effect on 24-month mortality (adjusted odds ratio = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.32 to 3.40). Conclusion and Relevance: In patients with end-stage cirrhosis, use of NSBBs did not affect 24-month mortality. More research is needed to determine when, and if, NSBBs should be discontinued in end-stage cirrhosis.

Pharmacologic Management of Portal Hypertension

Terlipressin, somatostatin, or octreotide are recommended as pharmacologic treatment of acute variceal hemorrhage. Nonselective β-blockers decrease the risk of variceal hemorrhage and hepatic decompensation, particularly in those 30% to 40% of patients with good hemodynamic response. Carvedilol, statins, and anticoagulants are promising agents in the management of portal hypertension. Recent advances in the pharmacologic treatment of portal hypertension have mainly focused on modifying an increased intrahepatic resistance through nitric oxide and/or modulation of vasoactive substances. Several novel pharmacologic agents for portal hypertension are being evaluated in humans.

Liver volume index predicts the risk of esophageal variceal hemorrhage in cirrhotic patients on propranolol prophylaxis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) are used for primary prevention of esophageal variceal hemorrhage (VH) in patients with portal hypertension, but a significant number of patients develop VH while on NSBB therapy. In this study, we sought to determine whether liver volume can predict the risk of primary prophylaxis failure in cirrhotic patients on NSBB therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of 309 patients on prophylactic propranolol was analyzed. Liver volume was measured in portal venous phase images of multidetector computed tomography. Predictors of VH were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model with competing-risks analysis. A nomogram was developed for estimation of the risk of primary prophylaxis failure.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 36 months, 37 patients on propranolol developed VH. Liver volume index, the ratio of measured-to-expected liver volume, was an independent predictor of VH (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37 to 5.33; p = 0.004) as were the presence of large varices and the absence of ascites. A nomogram-based volume score of > 0.6 was predictive of prophylaxis failure (HR, 7.54; 95% CI, 2.88 to 19.73; p < 0.001). Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that a nomogram-based risk score had significantly better discriminatory power than the North Italian Endoscopy Club index in predicting prophylaxis failure at 6 and 8 years.

CONCLUSION

Liver volume index is an independent predictor of first VH and a nomogram-based volume score stratifies the VH risk in cirrhotic patients on propranolol prophylaxis.

Primary and secondary prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: current state of the art

Introduction: Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis represents a frequent and severe complication in cirrhotic patients with ascites. In daily practice, the diagnosis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis might be challenging in the absence of the typical signs and symptoms of infection such as fever or leukocytosis. Areas covered: Aim of this review is to revise the current state of the art on primary and secondary spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Literature search in Medline/Pubmed was performed. Expert opinion: Historically, gram-negative bacteria were the most frequent etiologic agents of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, with Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. being the most frequently isolated bacteria. However, major changes in this regard occurred over the last few decades with an increasing prevalence of gram-positive, quinolone-resistant, and multidrug-resistant bacteria. In particular, the increasing prevalence of quinolone-resistant bacteria challenged the prominent role of norfloxacin in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis prevention. Given the high mortality rate and the risk of developing the hepatorenal syndrome, prophylaxis of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is indicated in three high-risk populations: patients with acute gastrointestinal hemorrhage, patients with low total protein content in ascitic fluid and advanced cirrhosis, and patients with a previous history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (secondary prophylaxis).

Current approaches to the management of patients with cirrhotic ascites

This review describes current approaches to the management of patients with cirrhotic ascites in relation to the severity of its clinical manifestations. The PubMed database, the Google Scholar retrieval system, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the reference lists from related articles were used to search for relevant publications. Articles corresponding to the aim of the review were selected for 1991-2018 using the keywords: "liver cirrhosis," "portal hypertension," "ascites," "pathogenesis," "diagnostics," and "treatment." Uncomplicated and refractory ascites in patients with cirrhosis were the inclusion criteria. The literature analysis has shown that despite the achievements of modern hepatology, the presence of ascites is associated with poor prognosis and high mortality. The key to successful management of patients with ascites may be the stratification of the risk of an adverse outcome and personalized therapy. Pathogenetically based approach to the choice of pharmacotherapy and optimization of minimally invasive methods of treatment may improve the quality of life and increase the survival rate of this category of patients.

Management of acute variceal hemorrhage

Gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the major causes of death in patients with cirrhosis, and gastroesophageal varices represent the main source of hemorrhage. Even though in the last decades survival has been improved because of the widespread adoption of effective treatments and optimization of general medical care, mortality is still significantly high, and decompensated patients pose a complex challenge requiring a multidisciplinary approach that is crucial to improve survival. The aims of this commentary are to review the most recent advances in the management of esophageal variceal bleeding and to highlight useful information to aid hepatologists in clinical practice.

Assessing the safety of beta-blocker therapy in cirrhosis patients with ascites: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Beta-blocker therapy is effective at reducing risks of variceal bleeding. However, beta-blockers may detrimentally exacerbate the underlying haemodynamic changes in cirrhosis. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate impact of beta-blockers on all-cause mortality among cirrhosis patients with ascites.

METHODS

A literature search identified studies that evaluated beta-blocker vs no beta-blocker therapy in cirrhosis patients with ascites. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality with subcohort analysis of patients with refractory or severe ascites. Quality of observational studies was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and overall certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

Eight observational studies, representing 3627 cirrhosis patients with ascites (1630 treated with beta-blockers and 1997 not treated), were included. Pooled all-cause mortality was 38.6% in beta-blocker group vs 42.2% in no beta-blocker group (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.77-1.13, χ²  = 54.03, I²  = 87%). Subcohort analysis of cirrhosis patients with refractory or severe ascites demonstrated 33.3% mortality in beta-blocker group vs 32.1% in no beta-blocker group (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.70-1.40, χ²  = 32.99, and I²  = 82%). Three studies were good quality and five studies were fair quality. GRADE rating was 'very low' certainty of evidence, given concern for bias and inconsistency stemming from significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

No significant increase in all-cause mortality was observed in cirrhosis patients with ascites treated with beta-blockers. However, given the low certainty of the evidence, high quality prospective studies are needed.

Hepatorenal Syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome is a severe complication of end-stage cirrhosis characterized by increased splanchnic blood flow, hyperdynamic state, a state of decreased central volume, activation of vasoconstrictor systems, and extreme kidney vasoconstriction leading to decreased GFR. The contribution of systemic inflammation, a key feature of cirrhosis, in the development of hepatorenal syndrome has been highlighted in recent years. The mechanisms by which systemic inflammation precipitates kidney circulatory changes during hepatorenal syndrome need to be clarified. Early diagnosis is central in the management and recent changes in the definition of hepatorenal syndrome help identify patients at an earlier stage. Vasoconstrictive agents (terlipressin in particular) and albumin are the first-line treatment option. Several controlled studies proved that terlipressin is effective at reversing hepatorenal syndrome and may improve short-term survival. Not all patients are responders, and even in responders, early mortality rates are very high in the absence of liver transplantation. Liver transplantation is the only curative treatment of hepatorenal syndrome. In the long term, patients transplanted with hepatorenal syndrome tend to have lower GFR compared with patients without hepatorenal syndrome. Differentiating hepatorenal syndrome from acute tubular necrosis (ATN) is often a challenging yet important step because vasoconstrictors are not justified for the treatment of ATN. Hepatorenal syndrome and ATN may be considered as a continuum rather than distinct entities. Emerging biomarkers may help differentiate these two conditions and provide prognostic information on kidney recovery after liver transplantation, and potentially affect the decision for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation.

Comparison of Therapies for Primary Prevention of Esophageal Variceal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare the efficacy of different approaches in primary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding and overall survival in patients with cirrhosis with large varices. Thirty-two randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with 3,362 adults with cirrhosis with large esophageal varices and no prior history of bleeding, with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up, were included. Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB), isosorbide-mononitrate (ISMN), carvedilol, and variceal band ligation (VBL), alone or in combination, were compared with each other or placebo. Primary outcomes were reduction of all-cause mortality and prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding. Random-effects NMA was performed and summary estimates were expressed as odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (OR; CI). Quality of evidence was critically appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Moderate quality evidence supports NSBB monotherapy (0.70; 0.49-1.00) or in combination with VBL (0.49; 0.23-1.02) or ISMN (0.44; 0.21-0.93) for decreasing mortality in patients with cirrhosis with large esophageal varices and no prior history of bleeding. Moderate-quality evidence supports carvedilol (0.21; 0.08-0.56) and VBL monotherapy (0.33; 0.19-0.55) or in combination with NSBB (0.34; 0.14-0.86), and low-quality evidence supports NSBB monotherapy (0.64; 0.38-1.07) for primary prevention of variceal bleeding. VBL carries a higher risk of serious adverse events compared with NSBB. Conclusion: NSBB monotherapy may decrease all-cause mortality and the risk of first variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis with large esophageal varices. Additionally, NSBB carries a lower risk of serious complications compared with VBL. Therefore, NSBB may be the preferred initial approach for primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding.

Use of nonselective β blockers after variceal eradication in cirrhotic patients undergoing secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding: a critical review of current evidence

Nonselective β blockers (NSBBs) combined with esophageal variceal ligation (EVL) are recommended for secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) in cirrhotic patients according to the current practice guidelines and consensus. However, until now, there is a paucity of recommendations regarding the use of NSBBs in cirrhotic patients who achieved variceal eradication. In this review paper, we firstly introduced a case who achieved variceal eradication after additional use of NSBBs for secondary prophylaxis of EVB and then did not require further endoscopic therapy during repeated endoscopic surveillance, and subsequently discuss the importance of NSBBs for secondary prophylaxis of EVB, the effect of NSBBs after variceal eradication, adherence to NSBBs, screening for variceal recurrence, and timing of endoscopic surveillance after variceal eradication.

Nonselective Beta-Blockers Do Not Affect Survival in Cirrhotic Patients with Ascites

BACKGROUND

The role of nonselective beta-blockers in cirrhotic patients with ascites has been recently questioned; however, definitive evidence in this regard is still lacking.

AIMS

To analyze published data on the influence of nonselective beta-blockers as compared to control group on survival of cirrhotic patients with ascites.

METHODS

Computerized bibliographic search on the main databases was performed. Hazard ratios from Kaplan-Meier curves were extracted in order to perform an unbiased comparison of survival estimates. Secondary outcomes were mortality in patients with refractory ascites, pooled rate of nonselective beta-blockers interruption, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and hepato-renal syndrome incidence.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies with 8279 patients were included. Overall survival was comparable between the two groups (hazard ratio = 0.86, 0.71-1.03, p = 0.11). Study design resulted as the main source of heterogeneity in sensitivity analysis and meta-regression. Mortality in refractory ascites patients was similar in the two groups (odds ratio = 0.90, 0.45-1.79; p = 0.76). No difference in spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (odds ratio = 0.78, 0.47-1.29, p = 0.33) and hepato-renal syndrome incidence (odds ratio = 1.22, 0.48-3.09; p = 0.67) was observed. Pooled rate of nonselective beta-blockers interruption was 18.6% (5.2-32.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our findings, nonselective beta-blockers should not be routinely withheld in patients with cirrhosis and ascites, even if refractory.

Liver cirrhosis-effect on QT interval and cardiac autonomic nervous system activity

AIM

To examine the impact of liver cirrhosis on QT interval and cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN).

METHODS

A total of 51 patients with cirrhosis and 51 controls were examined. Standard 12-lead electrocardiogram recordings were obtained and QT as well as corrected QT interval (QTc) and their dispersions (dQT, dQTc) were measured and calculated using a computer-based program. The diagnosis of CAN was based upon the battery of the tests proposed by Ewing and Clarke and the consensus statements of the American Diabetes Association. CAN was diagnosed when two out of the four classical Ewing tests were abnormal.

RESULTS

QT, QTc and their dispersions were significantly longer (P < 0.01) in patients with cirrhosis than in controls. No significant differences in QT interval were found among the subgroups according to the etiology of cirrhosis. Multivariate regression analysis after controlling for age, gender and duration of cirrhosis demonstrated significant association between QT and presence of diabetes mellitus [standardized regression coefficient (beta) = 0.45, P = 0.02] and treatment with diuretics (beta = 0.55, P = 0.03), but not with the Child-Pugh score (P = 0.54). Prevalence of CAN was common (54.9%) among patients with cirrhosis and its severity was associated with the Child-Pugh score (r = 0.33, P = 0.02). Moreover, patients with decompensated cirrhosis had more severe CAN that those with compensated cirrhosis (P = 0.03). No significant association was found between severity of CAN and QT interval duration.

CONCLUSION

Patients with cirrhosis have QT prolongation. Treatment with diuretics is associated with longer QT. CAN is common in patients with cirrhosis and its severity is associated with severity of the disease.

Beta-blockers in hospitalised patients with cirrhosis and ascites: mortality and factors determining discontinuation and reinitiation

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that beta-blockers may increase mortality in patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites but the effect of beta-blockers discontinuation or reinitiation has not been examined.

AIMS

To compare, in hospitalised patients with cirrhosis and ascites, the effect of BB on survival and to examine the effect/predictors of beta-blockers discontinuation and reinitiation.

METHODS

Sub-analysis of NACSELD (North American consortium for the study of end-stage liver disease, database containing prospective data on hospitalised patients with cirrhosis) data from 7 centres enrolling >100 patients with ascites. Data on BB discontinuation and reinitiation were collected by chart review.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and sixteen patients, 307 (43%) on beta-blockers at admission and 366 (51%) with refractory ascites, were followed to death or hospital discharge. Beta-blocker use was associated with a lower white blood cell count at admission. Beta-blocker use in hospitalised patients with ascites was not associated with a higher mortality, even in those with refractory ascites. No significant changes in mean arterial pressure (MAP) were observed between groups. Discontinuation of beta-blockers (49%) was driven by low MAP, infection and acute kidney injury at time of discontinuation but was not associated with a higher mortality. Beta-blocker reinitiation occurred in 40% prior to discharge and was mainly driven by an increase in MAP.

CONCLUSIONS

Beta-blocker use is safe in patients with cirrhosis and ascites (including those with refractory ascites) provided beta-blockers are discontinued in the presence of a low MAP and reinitiated once MAP reincreases. A potentially beneficial anti-inflammatory effect of beta-blockers is suggested.

Beta-blockers in patients with advanced liver disease: Has the dust settled?

Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) have been the backbone for the treatment of portal hypertension in cirrhosis for the last 3 decades. A publication in 2010 of a prospective observational study suggested that NSBBs could increase mortality in patients with refractory ascites. This opened a controversy about the safety and efficacy of NSBBs in patients with advanced liver disease and led to the publication of a large corpus of observational data assessing the safety of NSBBs in patients with advanced cirrhosis. In this article, we briefly review the clinical pharmacology of NSBBs, the pathophysiological basis for the underlying benefits and harms of NSBBs in advanced cirrhosis, and the evidence in favor and against the use of NSBBs in specific scenarios. Finally, we summarize the current recommendations and propose areas of opportunity for future research. Liver Transplantation 23 1058-1069 2017 AASLD.

Beta adrenergic blockade and decompensated cirrhosis

Non-selective betablockers (NSBBs) remain the cornerstone of medical treatment of portal hypertension. The evidence for their efficacy to prevent variceal bleeding is derived from prospective trials, which largely excluded patients with refractory ascites and renal failure. In parallel to the increasing knowledge on portal hypertension-induced changes in systemic hemodynamics, cardiac function, and renal perfusion, emerging studies have raised concerns about harmful effects of NSBBs. Clinicians are facing an ongoing controversy on the use of NSBBs in patients with advanced cirrhosis. On the one hand, NSBBs are effective in preventing variceal bleeding and might also have beneficial non-hemodynamic effects, however, they also potentially induce hypotension and limit the cardiac reserve. An individualized NSBB regimen tailored to the specific pathophysiological stage of cirrhosis might optimize patient management at this point. This article aims to give practical recommendations on the use of NSBBs in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

Non-selective β-blockers in advanced cirrhosis: a critical review of the effects on overall survival and renal function

Introduction

Non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) are widely prescribed in patients with cirrhosis for primary and secondary prophylaxis of bleeding oesophageal varices. Furthermore, it has been suggested that the clinical benefits of NSBBs may extend beyond their haemodynamic effects. Recently, a potentially harmful effect has been described in patients with refractory ascites or spontaneous bacterial peritonitis.

Methodology

A comprehensive literature search on β-blockers and cirrhosis survival using the electronic databases PubMed/MEDLINE, AMED, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Full-text manuscripts published over more than 35 years, from 1980 to April 2016 were reviewed for relevance and reference lists were cross-checked for additional pertinent studies regarding potential NSBB effects, especially focused on those concerned with survival and/or acute kidney injury (AKI).

Discussion

The proposed review will be able to provide valuable evidence to help decision making in the use of NSBB for the treatment of advanced cirrhosis and highlights some limitations in existing evidence to direct future research.