Short-term hemodynamic effects of β-blockers influence survival of patients with decompensated cirrhosis

The clinical relevance of the new criteria for cirrhotic cardiomyopathy and future directions

Cardiac dysfunction in patients with liver disease has been recognized since the 1950s. Initially attributed to shared risk factors, it is now evident that cardiac dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis can occur in the absence of known cardiac, that is, coronary artery and valvular heart disease, and across all etiologies for cirrhosis. In 1996, this myocardial dysfunction was termed cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM). The pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying CCM include impaired beta-adrenergic membrane function and circulating proinflammatory and cardiotoxic substances. In 2005, the first diagnostic criteria for CCM were introduced enabling greater sensitivity and accuracy of diagnosis. Since 2005, advancements in echocardiographic methods and a better understanding of the pathophysiology of cardiac dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis necessitated a revision of CCM criteria. Changes in CCM criteria included the removal of blunted contractile or heart rate response on stress testing and the addition of global longitudinal systolic strain. The refinement of criteria for diastolic dysfunction was also incorporated into the new diagnostic approach. Since 2020, the prevalence of the disorder and clinical considerations for pretransplant, peritransplant, and posttransplant patients with cirrhosis have been further evaluated, and CCM was found to adversely impact clinical outcomes during all 3 phases of care. Future research considerations should address the timing of universal echocardiographic screening for patients with cirrhosis, the utility of biomarkers in aiding CCM diagnosis, the impact of CCM on right heart function, and the role of anti-remodeling agents after liver transplant.

Preventing the progression of cirrhosis to decompensation and death

Two main stages are differentiated in patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD), one compensated (cACLD) with an excellent prognosis, and the other decompensated (dACLD), defined by the appearance of complications (ascites, variceal bleeding and hepatic encephalopathy) and associated with high mortality. Preventing the progression to dACLD might dramatically improve prognosis and reduce the burden of care associated with ACLD. Portal hypertension is a major driver of the transition from cACLD to dACLD, and a portal pressure of ≥10 mmHg defines clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) as the threshold from which decompensating events may occur. In recent years, innovative studies have provided evidence supporting new strategies to prevent decompensation in cACLD. These studies have yielded major advances, including the development of noninvasive tests (NITs) to identify patients with CSPH with reasonable confidence, the demonstration that aetiological therapies can prevent disease progression and even achieve regression of cirrhosis, and the finding that non-selective β-blockers can effectively prevent decompensation in patients with cACLD and CSPH, mainly by reducing the risk of ascites, the most frequent decompensating event. Here, we review the evidence supporting new strategies to manage cACLD to prevent decompensation and the caveats for their implementation, from patient selection using NITs to ancillary therapies.

Portal hypertension: recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Consensus document sponsored by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) and the Biomedical Research Network Centre for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBERehd)

Portal hypertension is a hemodynamic abnormality that complicates the course of cirrhosis, as well as other diseases that affect the portal venous circulation. The development of portal hypertension compromises prognosis, especially when it rises above a certain threshold known as clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). In the consensus conference on Portal Hypertension promoted by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver and the Hepatic and Digestive diseases area of the Biomedical Research Networking Center (CIBERehd), different aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension caused by cirrhosis or other diseases were discussed. The outcome of this discussion was a set of recommendations that achieved varying degrees of consensus among panelists and are reflected in this consensus document. The six areas under discussion were: the relevance of CSPH and the non-invasive methods used for its diagnosis and that of cirrhosis, the prevention of the first episode of decompensation and its recurrence, the treatment of acute variceal bleeding and other complications of portal hypertension, the indications for the use of TIPS, and finally, the diagnosis and treatment of liver vascular diseases.

Portal hypertension: recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Consensus document sponsored by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) and the Biomedical Research Network Center for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBERehd)

Portal hypertension is a hemodynamic abnormality that complicates the course of cirrhosis, as well as other diseases that affect the portal venous circulation. The development of portal hypertension compromises prognosis, especially when it rises above a certain threshold known as clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). In the consensus conference on Portal Hypertension promoted by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver and the Hepatic and Digestive diseases area of the Biomedical Research Networking Center (CIBERehd), different aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension caused by cirrhosis or other diseases were discussed. The outcome of this discussion was a set of recommendations that achieved varying degrees of consensus among panelists and are reflected in this consensus document. The six areas under discussion were: the relevance of clinically significant portal hypertension and the non-invasive methods used for its diagnosis and that of cirrhosis, the prevention of the first episode of decompensation and its recurrence, the treatment of acute variceal bleeding and other complications of portal hypertension, the indications for the use of TIPS, and finally, the diagnosis and treatment of liver vascular diseases.

Carvedilol vs. propranolol for the prevention of decompensation and mortality in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Data on the effectiveness of classical non-selective beta-blockers (cNSBBs, i.e., propranolol and nadolol) vs. carvedilol in patients with cirrhosis are scarce. In the present study, we aimed to compare their potential for preventing decompensation and mortality in patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter retrospective study including patients with compensated and decompensated cirrhosis with clinically significant portal hypertension, undergoing measurement of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) to assess acute hemodynamic response to intravenous propranolol (i.e., HVPG decrease ≥10% from baseline value) prior to primary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding. Outcomes were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting in a competitive risk framework.

RESULTS

A total of 540 patients were included, 256 with compensated (cNSBBs n = 111; carvedilol n = 145) and 284 with decompensated (cNSBBs n = 134; carvedilol n = 150) cirrhosis. Median follow-up was 36.3 (IQR 16.9-61.0) and 30.7 (IQR 13.1-52.2) months, respectively. After covariate balancing, compared to cNSBBs, carvedilol significantly reduced the risk of a first decompensation in compensated patients (subdistribution hazard ratio 0.61; 95% CI 0.41-0.92; p = 0.019) and a combined endpoint of further decompensation/death in decompensated patients (subdistribution hazard ratio 0.57; 95% CI 0.42-0.77; p <0.0001). A second HVPG was conducted on 176 (68.8%, compensated) and 177 (62.3%, decompensated) patients. Acute non-responders, both compensated (11.1% vs. 29.4%; p = 0.422) and decompensated (16.0% vs. 43.6%: p = 0.0247) patients, showed a higher likelihood of achieving a chronic hemodynamic response with carvedilol. The safety profile of each type of NSBB was comparable in both cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data endorse the current recommendation favoring the use of carvedilol for the prevention of a first decompensation of cirrhosis and suggest extending the recommendation to patients with decompensated cirrhosis without recurrent or refractory ascites.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

This study addresses a gap in the comparative effectiveness of classical non-selective beta-blockers (e.g., propranolol and nadolol) vs. carvedilol in managing cirrhosis in both compensated and decompensated stages. Our results support the preferential use of carvedilol in both settings due to its superior efficacy in reducing first and further decompensation. However, owing to the retrospective nature of the study and inherent selection biases, we advise against broadly applying these findings to patients with decompensated cirrhosis who exhibit signs of circulatory dysfunction or recurrent/refractory ascites.

Pharmacological Interventions for Cirrhotic Ascites: From Challenges to Emerging Therapeutic Horizons

Ascites is the most common complication in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. This condition results in a severely impaired quality of life, excessive healthcare use, recurrent hospitalizations and significant morbidity and mortality. While loop diuretics and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists are commonly employed for symptom relief, our understanding of their impact on survival remains limited. A comprehensive understanding of the underlying pathophysiological mechanism of ascites is crucial for its optimal management. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is increasingly believed to play a pivotal role in the formation of cirrhotic ascites, as RAAS overactivation leads to a reduction in urine sodium excretion then a decrease in the ability of the kidneys to excrete water. In this review, the authors provide an overview of the pathogenesis of cirrhotic ascites, the challenges associated with current pharmacologic treatments, and the previous attempts to modulate the RAAS, followed by a description of some emerging targeted RAAS agents with the potential to be used to treat ascites.

Hemodynamic effects of carvedilol plus simvastatin in cirrhosis with severe portal hypertension and suboptimal response to β-blockers: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Carvedilol is a nonselective β-blocker (NSBB) with anti-α1-adrenergic activity, more effective than traditional NSBBs in reducing portal pressure hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). However, 35%-45% of patients still have insufficient HVPG decrease. Statins ameliorate endothelial dysfunction, reduce hepatic vascular resistance, and have pleiotropic effects. We investigated whether the addition of simvastatin improves the efficacy of carvedilol on HVPG in cirrhosis with severe portal hypertension and suboptimal response to traditional NSBBs.

METHODS

Patients with cirrhosis and high-risk varices referred for primary prophylaxis were consecutively included. HVPG was measured at baseline and again after i.v. propranolol. Suboptimal responders (HVPG decrease <20%) were treated with carvedilol and were randomized to double-blind administration of placebo or simvastatin. Chronic HVPG response was assessed after 4-6 weeks, repeating HVPG measurements after a standard liquid meal to estimate endothelial dysfunction. Plasma samples were obtained before each study to investigate inflammatory parameters.

RESULTS

Of 184 eligible patients, 82 were randomized to carvedilol + simvastatin (N = 41) or carvedilol + placebo (N = 41). Baseline characteristics were similar. HVPG significantly decreased with both, carvedilol + simvastatin (18.6 ± 4 to 15.7 ± 4 mm Hg, p < 0.001) and carvedilol + placebo (18.9 ± 3 to 16.9 ± 3 mm Hg, p < 0.001). The decrease was greater with carvedilol + simvastatin (2.97 ± 2.5 vs. 2.05 ± 1.6 mm Hg, p = 0.031). An HVPG decrease ≥20% occurred in 37% versus 15% of patients, respectively (OR: 3.37, 95% CI = 1.15-9.85; p = 0.021). With test meal, HVPG increased in both groups ( p < 0.01), although carvedilol + simvastatin attenuated such increment (12 ± 8% vs. 23 ± 16%, p < 0.001). Cytokine levels (Interleukine-6, monocyte-chemoattractant protein-1, and malondialdehyde) decreased significantly more with carvedilol + simvastatin ( p < 0.01). The incidence of adverse events was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe portal hypertension (all with high-risk varices) and suboptimal hemodynamic response to traditional NSBBs, combined therapy with carvedilol plus simvastatin significantly enhances the portal pressure reduction achieved with carvedilol monotherapy, improves endothelial dysfunction, and reduces proinflammatory cytokines.

Influence of further decompensation on survival across clinical stages of decompensated cirrhosis: The role of portal hypertension and HVPG changes

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Decompensated-cirrhosis encompasses several stages with different prognosis, such as bleeding, ascites and bleeding-plus-ascites. Development of further-decompensation worsens survival, while non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) can modify the risk. However, how this applies to each stage is uncertain. We aimed to investigate, in each stage of decompensated-cirrhosis, the influence of further-decompensation on mortality and whether changes in portal-pressure (HVPG) under NSBBs influence these outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with variceal bleeding were consecutively included differentiating those with bleeding-alone from those who also had ascites. Patients with ascites and high-risk varices referred for primary-prophylaxis were also investigated. A baseline haemodynamic study was performed and was repeated after 1-3-months under NSBBs. Outcomes were investigated by competing-risk.

RESULTS

Totally 103 patients had bleeding-alone, 186 bleeding-plus-ascites and 187 ascites-alone. Mean follow-up was 32-months (IQR, 12-60). Patients with bleeding-plus-ascites had higher HVPG and were more hyperdynamic than patients with ascites-alone and these than those with bleeding-alone. At each stage, the mortality risk was more than twice in patients developing further-decompensation vs. those without (p < .001). In each stage, HVPG-decrease under NSBBs showed better discrimination to predict further-decompensation than the baseline MELD, Child-Pugh or HVPG, by time-dependent ROC-curves (c-statistic >70%). At each stage, patients without HVPG-decreases, either ≥10% or ≥20% from the baseline, had higher risk of further-decompensation (sHR from 2.43 to 6.73, p < .01) and worse survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In each stage of decompensated cirrhosis, mortality risk significantly and very markedly increase with further-decompensation. HVPG-non-response to NSBBs may adequately stratify the risk of further decompensation and death, in each stage. This suggests potential benefit with pre-emptive therapies in HVPG-non-responders at each-stage.

Cardiac dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis and acute decompensation

The prevalence of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM) has been reported as high as 60%-70% in patients with liver cirrhosis and is associated with various negative outcomes. There has been a growing understanding of CCM over recent years. Indeed, the development of imaging techniques has enabled new diagnostic criteria to be proposed by the Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy Consortium. However, important unanswered questions remain over pathophysiological mechanisms, optimal diagnostic modalities and potential treatment options. While there has been an increasing volume of literature evaluating CCM, there is a lack of clarity on its implications in acute decompensation, acute-on-chronic liver failure and following interventions such as transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt insertion and liver transplantation. This review aims to summarise the literature in these challenging domains and suggest where future research should focus. We conclude that systemic inflammation and structural myocardial changes are likely to be crucial in the pathophysiology of the disease, but the relative contribution of different components remains elusive. Furthermore, future studies need to use standardised diagnostic criteria for CCM as well as incorporate newer imaging techniques assessing both myocardial structure and function. Finally, while specific treatments are currently lacking, therapeutics targeting systemic inflammation, microbial dysbiosis and bacterial translocation are promising targets and warrant further research.

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.

Therapies for Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy: Current Perspectives and Future Possibilities

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM) is defined as cardiac dysfunction associated with cirrhosis in the absence of pre-existing heart disease. CCM manifests as the enlargement of cardiac chambers, attenuated systolic and diastolic contractile responses to stress stimuli, and repolarization changes. CCM significantly contributes to mortality and morbidity in patients who undergo liver transplantation and contributes to the pathogenesis of hepatorenal syndrome/acute kidney injury. There is currently no specific treatment. The traditional management for non-cirrhotic cardiomyopathies, such as vasodilators or diuretics, is not applicable because an important feature of cirrhosis is decreased systemic vascular resistance; therefore, vasodilators further worsen the peripheral vasodilatation and hypotension. Long-term diuretic use may cause electrolyte imbalances and potentially renal injury. The heart of the cirrhotic patient is insensitive to cardiac glycosides. Therefore, these types of medications are not useful in patients with CCM. Exploring the therapeutic strategies of CCM is of the utmost importance. The present review summarizes the possible treatment of CCM. We detail the current status of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) in the management of cirrhotic patients and discuss the controversies surrounding NSBBs in clinical practice. Other possible therapeutic agents include drugs with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-apoptotic functions; such effects may have potential clinical application. These drugs currently are mainly based on animal studies and include statins, taurine, spermidine, galectin inhibitors, albumin, and direct antioxidants. We conclude with speculations on the future research directions in CCM treatment.

Propranolol can correct prolonged QT intervals in patients with cirrhosis

Background

Prolonged QT intervals are extremely common in patients with cirrhosis and affect their treatment outcomes. Propranolol is often used to prevent gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis; however, it is uncertain whether propranolol exerts a corrective effect on QT interval prolongation in patients with cirrhosis.

Aim

The study aimed to investigate the therapeutic effects of propranolol on patients with cirrhosis and prolonged QT intervals.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study approach was adopted. Patients with cirrhosis complicated by moderate-to-severe gastroesophageal varices, who were hospitalized at the Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University between 1 December 2020 and 31 November 2022, were included in the study. The patients were divided into the propranolol and control groups based on whether they had received propranolol. Upon admission, the patients underwent tests on liver and kidney functions, electrolytes, and coagulation function, as well as abdominal ultrasonography and electrocardiography. In addition to conventional treatment, the patients were followed up after the use or non-use of propranolol for treatment and subsequently underwent reexamination of the aforementioned tests.

Results

The propranolol group (26 patients) had an average baseline corrected QT (QTc) interval of 450.23 ± 37.18 ms, of which 14 patients (53.8%) exhibited QTc interval prolongation. Follow-up was continued for a median duration of 7.00 days after the administration of propranolol and conventional treatment. Electrocardiographic reexamination revealed a decrease in the QTc interval to 431.04 ± 34.64 ms (p = 0.014), and the number of patients with QTc interval prolongation decreased to five (19.2%; p < 0.001). After treatment with propranolol and multimodal therapy, QTc interval normalization occurred in nine patients with QTc interval prolongation, leading to a normalization rate of 64.3% (9/14). The control group (n = 58) had an average baseline QTc interval of 453.74 ± 30.03 ms, of which 33 patients (56.9%) exhibited QTc interval prolongation. After follow-up for a median duration of 7.50 days, the QTc interval was 451.79 ± 34.56 ms (p = 0.482), and the number of patients with QTc interval prolongation decreased to 30 (51.7%; p = 0.457). The QTc interval normalization rate of patients in the control group with QTc interval prolongation was merely 10.0% (3/33), which was significantly lower than that in the propranolol group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with cirrhosis complicated by QT interval prolongation, the short-term use of propranolol aids in correction of a long QT interval and provides positive therapeutic value for cirrhotic cardiomyopathy.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Propranolol Use During Ligation Program for Secondary Prophylaxis of Esophageal Variceal Bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) plus nonselective β-blockers (NSBB) is the standard of care for secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB). This trial aimed to compare the rebleeding rates between EVL plus NSBB till eradication of esophageal varices (EEV) and EVL plus long-term NSBB.

METHODS

After control of acute EVB, patients with cirrhosis were randomized into 2 groups, with group A patients receiving EVL plus propranolol till EEV, while group B patients received standard of care with continuation of propranolol. Recurrent varices were ligated at follow-up endoscopy in both groups.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 23.0 months in group A (n = 106) and 23.6 months in group B (n = 106). Twelve patients (11.3%) in group A and 11 (10.4%) in group B had recurrent EVB. The difference in rebleeding rates and the 95% confidence interval (CI) was 0.9% (-7.5% to 9.3%). The upper 95% CI bound of the difference was within the margin of 13.2%, and the noninferiority of group A to group B was established. Thirty-eight patients (35.8%) in group A and 40 (37.7%) in group B had further decompensation, with the difference (95% CI) of -1.9% (-14.9% to 11.1%). Twenty-four patients (22.6%) in group A and 26 (24.5%) in group B expired, with the difference (95% CI) in mortality rates of -1.9% (-13.3% to 9.5%).

DISCUSSION

EVL plus propranolol till EEV was noninferior to EVL plus continuing propranolol in secondary prophylaxis of EVB, but the impact on further decompensation and transplantation-free survival deserved further investigation.

Improving primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding by adapting therapy to the clinical stage of cirrhosis. A competing-risk meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) and endoscopic variceal-ligation (EVL) have similar efficacy preventing first variceal bleeding. Compensated and decompensated cirrhosis are markedly different stages, which may impact treatment outcomes. We aimed to assess the efficacy of NSBBs vs EVL on survival in patients with high-risk varices without previous bleeding, stratifying risk according to compensated/decompensated stage of cirrhosis.

METHODS

By systematic review, we identified RCTs comparing NSBBs vs EVL, in monotherapy or combined, for primary bleeding prevention. We performed a competing-risk, time-to-event meta-analysis, using individual patient data (IPD) obtained from principal investigators of RCTs. Analyses were stratified according to previous decompensation of cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Of 25 RCTs eligible, 14 failed to provide IPD and 11 were included, comprising 1400 patients (656 compensated, 744 decompensated), treated with NSBBs (N = 625), EVL (N = 546) or NSBB+EVL (N = 229). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Overall, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs (subdistribution hazard-ratio (sHR) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.75-1.49) and with EVL + NSBBs vs either monotherapy, with low heterogeneity (I2  = 28.7%). In compensated patients, mortality risk was higher with EVL vs NSBBs (sHR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.11-2.77) and not significantly lower with NSBBs+EVL vs NSBBs, without heterogeneity (I2  = 0%). In decompensated patients, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs and with NSBBs+EVL vs. either monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with compensated cirrhosis and high-risk varices on primary prophylaxis, NSBBs significantly improved survival vs EVL, with no additional benefit noted adding EVL to NSBBs. In decompensated patients, survival was similar with both therapies. The study suggests that NSBBs are preferable when advising preventive therapy in compensated patients.

Cardiomyopathy in cirrhosis: From pathophysiology to clinical care

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM) is defined as systolic or diastolic dysfunction in the absence of prior heart disease or another identifiable cause in patients with cirrhosis, in whom it is an important determinant of outcome. Its underlying pathogenic/pathophysiological mechanisms are rooted in two distinct pathways: 1) factors associated with portal hypertension, hyperdynamic circulation, gut bacterial/endotoxin translocation and the resultant inflammatory phenotype; 2) hepatocellular insufficiency with altered synthesis or metabolism of substances such as proteins, lipids, carbohydrates, bile acids and hormones. Different criteria have been proposed to diagnose CCM; the first in 2005 by the World Congress of Gastroenterology, and more recently in 2019 by the Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy Consortium. These criteria mainly utilised echocardiographic evaluation, with the latter refining the evaluation of diastolic function and integrating global longitudinal strain into the evaluation of systolic function, an important addition since the haemodynamic changes that occur in advanced cirrhosis may lead to overestimation of systolic function by left ventricular ejection fraction. Advances in cardiac imaging, such as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and the incorporation of an exercise challenge, may help further refine the diagnosis of CCM. Over recent years, CCM has been shown to contribute to increased mortality and morbidity after major interventions, such as liver transplantation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt insertion, and to play a pathophysiologic role in the genesis of hepatorenal syndrome. In this review, we discuss the pathogenesis/pathophysiology of CCM, its clinical implications, and the role of cardiac imaging modalities including MRI. We also compare diagnostic criteria and review the potential diagnostic role of electrocardiographic QT prolongation. At present, no definitive medical therapy exists, but some promising potential treatment strategies for CCM are reviewed.

Correlation between hepatic venous pressure gradient and portal pressure gradient in patients with autoimmune cirrhotic portal hypertension and collateral branches of the hepatic vein

AIM

To assess the correlation and agreement between hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and portal pressure gradient (PPG) in patients with autoimmune liver diseases (ALD) and portal hypertension, and to investigate the extent to which hepatic vein collateralization affects the accuracy of this assessment.

METHODS

Ninety-eight patients with ALD between 2017 and 2021 who underwent transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt with conventional and innovative 15 mL pressurized contrast were selected to measure wedged hepatic venous pressure (WHVP) and portal venous pressure and to calculate the HVPG and PPG. Pearson's correlation was used for correlation analysis between the two groups. Bland-Altman plots were plotted to estimate the agreement between paired pressures.

RESULTS

The r values of PPG and HVPG in the early, middle, late, and portal venous visualization were 0.404, 0.789, 0.807, and 0.830, respectively, and the R2 values were 0.163, 0.622, 0.651, and 0.690, respectively. The p value for the r and R2 values in the early group was 0.015, and the p values in the remaining groups were less than 0.001. Bland-Altman plots showed that patients in the portal venous visualization group had the narrowest 95% limits of agreement. The mean value of the difference was close to the zero-scale line.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ALD, the correlation between the HVPG and PPG was good, and the later the collateral development, the better the correlation. Hepatic vein collateral was an essential factor in underestimating WHVP and HVPG, and the earlier the collateral appeared, the more obvious the underestimation.

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.

Comparation between novel online models and the AJCC 8th TNM staging system in predicting cancer-specific and overall survival of small cell lung cancer

Background

Most of previous studies on predictive models for patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) were single institutional studies or showed relatively low Harrell concordance index (C-index) values. To build an optimal nomogram, we collected clinicopathological characteristics of SCLC patients from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

Methods

24,055 samples with SCLC from 2010 to 2016 in the SEER database were analyzed. The samples were grouped into derivation cohort (n=20,075) and external validation cohort (n=3,980) based on America's different geographic regions. Cox regression analyses were used to construct nomograms predicting cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) using derivation cohort. The nomograms were internally validated by bootstrapping technique and externally validated by calibration plots. C-index was computed to compare the accuracy and discrimination power of our nomograms with the 8th of version AJCC TNM staging system and nomograms built in previous studies. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was applied to explore whether the nomograms had better clinical efficiency than the 8th version of AJCC TNM staging system.

Results

Age, sex, race, marital status, primary site, differentiation, T classification, N classification, M classification, surgical type, lymph node ratio, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were chosen as predictors of CSS and OS for SCLC by stepwise multivariable regression and were put into the nomograms. Internal and external validations confirmed the nomograms were accurate in prediction. C-indexes of the nomograms were relatively satisfactory in derivation cohort (CSS: 0.761, OS: 0.761) and external validation cohort (CSS: 0.764, OS: 0.764). The accuracy of the nomograms was superior to that of nomograms built in previous studies. DCA showed the nomograms conferred better clinical efficiency than 8th version of TNM staging system.

Conclusions

We developed practical nomograms for CSS (https://guowei2020.shinyapps.io/DynNom-CSS-SCLC/) and OS (https://drboidedwater.shinyapps.io/DynNom-OS-SCLC/) prediction of SCLC patients which may facilitate clinicians in individualized therapeutics.

Innovative angiography: a new approach to discover more hepatic vein collaterals in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension

BACKGROUND

The hemodynamics of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension are complex and variable. We aimed to investigate differences in venous pressures determined by innovative angiography and conventional angiography using balloon occlusion of the hepatic veins in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

METHODS

A total of 134 patients with alcoholic cirrhosis who fulfilled the inclusion criteria from June 2017 to June 2020 were included. During transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, conventional and innovative angiography were performed, and venous pressures were measured. A paired t-test and Pearson's correlation coefficient were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Conventional and innovative hepatic angiography detected lateral branches of the hepatic vein in 26 (19.4%) and 65 (48.5%) cases, respectively (P < 0.001). Innovative angiography detected a total of 65 patients with lateral shunts, of whom 37 (56.9%) had initial shunts. The average wedged hepatic venous pressure and portal venous pressure of the initial lateral branches were 21.27 ± 6.66 and 35.84 ± 7.86 mmHg, respectively, with correlation and determination coefficients of 0.342 (P < 0.05) and 0.117, respectively. The mean hepatic venous pressure gradient and portal pressure gradient were 9.59 ± 7.64 and 26.86 ± 6.78 mmHg, respectively, with correlation and determination coefficients of 0.292 (P = 0.079) and 0.085, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Innovative angiography reveals collateral branches of the hepatic veins more effectively than conventional angiography. Hepatic vein collateral branches are the primary factors leading to underestimation of wedged hepatic venous pressures and hepatic venous pressure gradients, with the initial hepatic vein collateral branches resulting in the most severe underestimations.

Pharmacotherapies for Portal Hypertension: Current Status and Expanding Indications

Purpose

Non-selective beta blockers remain pharmacotherapy of choice for prevention of first episode of variceal bleeding (primary prevention) and for prevention of its recurrence after initial hemostasis (secondary prophylaxis). This review will update the current and emerging pharmacological therapies for portal hypertension.

Recent findings

Data have emerged on carvedilol in preventing hepatic decompensation and improving patient survival among patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. Because measurement of WHVP is invasive and not feasible in routine practice, non-invasive tests with liver stiffness measurement in combination with platelet count may be accurate in identifying clinically significant portal hypertension.

Summary

Carvedilol is more effective in reducing portal pressure compared to nadolol or propranolol. Its use has expanded to reduce risk of hepatic decompensation among patients with CSPH, which can be identified non-invasively using liver stiffness and platelet count. Studies are needed on non-invasive biomarkers to guide and optimize pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension.

Beta-blockers in patients with liver cirrhosis: Pragmatism or perfection?

With increasing decompensation, hyperdynamic circulatory disturbance occurs in liver cirrhosis despite activation of vasoconstrictors. Here, the concept of a therapy with non-selective beta-blockers was established decades ago. They lower elevated portal pressure, protect against variceal hemorrhage, and may also have pleiotropic immunomodulatory effects. Recently, the beneficial effect of carvedilol, which blocks alpha and beta receptors, has been highlighted. Carvedilol leads to "biased-signaling" via recruitment of beta-arrestin. This effect and its consequences have not been sufficiently investigated in patients with liver cirrhosis. Also, a number of questions remain open regarding the expression of beta-receptors and its intracellular signaling and the respective consequences in the intra- and extrahepatic tissue compartments. Despite the undisputed role of non-selective beta-blockers in the treatment of liver cirrhosis, we still can improve the knowledge as to when and how beta-blockers should be used in which patients.

Carvedilol reduces the risk of decompensation and mortality in patients with compensated cirrhosis in a competing-risk meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Whether non-selective β-blockers can prevent decompensation of cirrhosis warrants clarification. Carvedilol might be particularly effective since its intrinsic vasodilatory activity may ameliorate hepatic vascular resistance, a major mechanism of portal hypertension in early cirrhosis. We assessed whether carvedilol may prevent decompensation and improve survival in patients with compensated cirrhosis and clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH).

METHODS

By systematic review we identified randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carvedilol vs. control therapy (no-active treatment or endoscopic variceal ligation [EVL]) in patients with cirrhosis and CSPH without previous bleeding. We performed a competing-risk time-to-event meta-analysis using individual patient data (IPD) obtained from principal investigators of RCTs. Only compensated patients were included. Primary outcomes were prevention of decompensation (liver transplantation and death were competing events) and death (liver transplantation was a competing event). Models were adjusted using propensity scores for baseline covariates with the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) approach.

RESULTS

Among 125 full-text studies evaluated, 4 RCTs were eligible. The 4 provided IPD and were included, comprising 352 patients with compensated cirrhosis, 181 treated with carvedilol and 171 controls (79 received EVL and 92 placebo). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Standardized differences were <10% by IPTW. The risk of developing decompensation of cirrhosis was lower with carvedilol than in controls (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR] 0.506; 95% CI 0.289-0.887; p = 0.017; I2 = 0.0%, Q-statistic-p = 0.880), mainly due to a reduced risk of ascites (SHR 0.491; 95% CI 0.247-0.974; p = 0.042; I2 = 0.0%, Q-statistic-p = 0.384). The risk of death was also lower with carvedilol (SHR 0.417; 95% CI 0.194-0.896; p = 0.025; I2 = 0.0%, Q-statistic-p = 0.989).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term carvedilol therapy reduced decompensation of cirrhosis and significantly improved survival in compensated patients with CSPH. This suggests that screening patients with compensated cirrhosis for CSPH to enable the prompt initiation of carvedilol could improve outcomes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019144786.

LAY SUMMARY

The transition from compensated cirrhosis to decompensated cirrhosis is associated with markedly reduced life expectancy. Therefore, preventing decompensation in patients with compensated cirrhosis would be associated with greatly improved patient outcomes. There has been controversy regarding the use of non-selective β-blockers (portal pressure-lowering medications) in patients with cirrhosis and elevated portal blood pressure (portal hypertension). Herein, using a competing-risk meta-analysis to optimize sample size and properly investigate cirrhosis as a multistate disease and outcomes as time-dependent events, we show that carvedilol (a non-selective β-blocker) is associated with a reduced risk of decompensating events and improved survival in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

Blunted cardiovascular effects of beta-blockers in patients with cirrhosis: Relation to severity?

Aims

Patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension are at high risk of developing complications such as variceal hemorrhage, ascites, and cardiac dysfunction, the latter of which is known as cirrhotic cardiomyopathy. Since non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) may aggravate hemodynamic complications we investigated the effect of real-time propranolol infusion on cardiac function in patients with varying degrees of cirrhosis.

Methods

Thirty-eight patients with Child-Pugh A (n = 17), B (n = 17) and C (n = 4) underwent liver vein catheterization and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. We assessed the effect of real-time propranolol infusion on the hepatic venous pressure gradient, cardiac index, stroke volume, ejection fraction, heart rate, and contractility.

Results

Nineteen patients were classified as responders to beta-blocker therapy. In pooling Child-Pugh B and C patients, the reduction in cardiac index by beta-blockade was weaker than in Child-Pugh A patients (-8.5% vs. -20.5%, p = 0.043). The effect of NSBB on portal pressure was inversely correlated to changes in the left atrium where the left atrial volume changed by 4 mL±18 in responders compared to 15 mL±11 in non-responders (p = 0.03). Finally, the baseline ejection fraction correlated inversely with the reduction in portal pressure (r = -0.39, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

We found the effect of beta-blockade on cardiac index in patients with advanced cirrhosis to be less potent than in patients with early cirrhosis, indicating that underlying cirrhotic cardiomyopathy increases, and the cardiac compensatory reserve becomes more compromised, with disease progression. The differential effects of beta-blockade in the left atrium may be used to predict the effect of beta-blockers on portal pressure, but further studies are needed to investigate this possibility.

Decreasing von Willebrand Factor Levels Upon Nonselective Beta Blocker Therapy Indicate a Decreased Risk of Further Decompensation, Acute-on-chronic Liver Failure, and Death

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonselective beta blockers (NSBBs) exert beneficial effects beyond lowering hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), which may be particularly relevant in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (DC), in whom bacterial translocation and bacterial-induced systemic inflammation drive the development of complications such as acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). We evaluated whether NSBB-related changes in von Willebrand factor (VWF) may serve as a biomarker for these effects.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, 159 prospectively characterized patients with clinically stable DC (ie, without acute decompensation) who underwent paired HVPG/VWF assessments before/on NSBB therapy were classified as 'VWF-responders' (as defined by a ≥5% decrease in VWF) versus 'VWF-non-responders.'

RESULTS

There were no major differences in baseline characteristics between VWF-responders (61%) and VWF-non-responders. VWF-responders showed more pronounced decreases in inflammation (procalcitonin), whereas rates of HVPG-response were similar. In line, NSBB-related changes in VWF correlated with the dynamics of bacterial translocation/inflammation (lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, C-reactive protein, and procalcitonin), rather than those of HVPG. Interestingly, VWF-responders also showed less pronounced NSBB-related decreases in mean arterial pressure, suggesting an amelioration of systemic vasodilatation. Finally, VWF-response was associated with decreased risks of further decompensation (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.555; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.337-0.912; P = .020), ACLF (aHR, 0.302; 95% CI, 0.126-0.721; P = .007), and liver-related death (aHR, 0.332; 95% CI, 0.179-0.616; P < .001) in Cox regression models adjusted for prognostic factors including changes in HVPG.

CONCLUSIONS

Decreases in VWF upon NSBB therapy reflect their anti-inflammatory activity, are accompanied by less pronounced adverse effects on systemic hemodynamics, and are independently associated with a decreased risk of further decompensation, ACLF, and death. VWF-response may discriminate between decompensated patients who benefit from NSBB treatment and have a favorable prognosis versus patients with poor outcomes.

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.

Mechanistic insights into the pathophysiology of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy

Myocardial dysfunction in end stage cirrhotic liver disease, termed cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, is a long known, but little understood comorbidity seen in ∼50% of adults and children who present for liver transplantation. Structural, functional, hemodynamic and electrocardiographic aberrations that occur in the heart as a direct consequence of a damaged liver, is associated with multi-organ failure and increased mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing surgical procedures such as porto-systemic shunt placement and liver transplantation. Despite its clinical significance and rapid advances in science and pharmacotherapy, there is yet no specific treatment for this disease. This may be due to a lack of understanding of the pathogenesis and mechanisms behind how a cirrhotic liver causes cardiac pathology. This review will focus specifically on insights into the molecular mechanisms that drive this liver-heart interaction. Deeper understanding of the etio-pathogenesis of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy will allow us to design and test treatments that can be targeted to prevent and/or reverse this co-morbid consequence of liver failure and improve health care delivery and outcomes in patients with cirrhosis.

Cyclic GMP in Liver Cirrhosis-Role in Pathophysiology of Portal Hypertension and Therapeutic Implications

The NO-cGMP signal transduction pathway plays a crucial role in tone regulation in hepatic sinusoids and peripheral blood vessels. In a cirrhotic liver, the key enzymes endothelial NO synthase (eNOS), soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC), and phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE-5) are overexpressed, leading to decreased cyclic guanosine-monophosphate (cGMP). This results in constriction of hepatic sinusoids, contributing about 30% of portal pressure. In contrast, in peripheral arteries, dilation prevails with excess cGMP due to low PDE-5. Both effects eventually lead to circulatory dysfunction in progressed liver cirrhosis. The conventional view of portal hypertension (PH) pathophysiology has been described using the "NO-paradox", referring to reduced NO availability inside the liver and elevated NO production in the peripheral systemic circulation. However, recent data suggest that an altered availability of cGMP could better elucidate the contrasting findings of intrahepatic vasoconstriction and peripheral systemic vasodilation than mere focus on NO availability. Preclinical and clinical data have demonstrated that targeting the NO-cGMP pathway in liver cirrhosis using PDE-5 inhibitors or sGC stimulators/activators decreases intrahepatic resistance through dilation of sinusoids, lowering portal pressure, and increasing portal venous blood flow. These results suggest further clinical applications in liver cirrhosis. Targeting the NO-cGMP system plays a role in possible reversal of liver fibrosis or cirrhosis. PDE-5 inhibitors may have therapeutic potential for hepatic encephalopathy. Serum/plasma levels of cGMP can be used as a non-invasive marker of clinically significant portal hypertension. This manuscript reviews new data about the role of the NO-cGMP signal transduction system in pathophysiology of cirrhotic portal hypertension and provides perspective for further studies.

Clinical algorithms for the prevention of variceal bleeding and rebleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis

Portal hypertension (PH), a common complication of liver cirrhosis, results in development of esophageal varices. When esophageal varices rupture, they cause significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding with mortality rates up to 20% despite state-of-the-art treatment. Thus, prophylactic measures are of utmost importance to improve outcomes of patients with PH. Several high-quality studies have demonstrated that non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) or endoscopic band ligation (EBL) are effective for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. In secondary prophylaxis, a combination of NSBB + EBL should be routinely used. Once esophageal varices develop and variceal bleeding occurs, standardized treatment algorithms should be followed to minimize bleeding-associated mortality. Special attention should be paid to avoidance of overtransfusion, early initiation of vasoconstrictive therapy, prophylactic antibiotics and early endoscopic therapy. Pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt should be used in all Child C10-C13 patients experiencing variceal bleeding, and potentially in Child B patients with active bleeding at endoscopy. The use of carvedilol, safety of NSBBs in advanced cirrhosis (i.e. with refractory ascites) and assessment of hepatic venous pressure gradient response to NSBB is discussed. In the present review, we give an overview on the rationale behind the latest guidelines and summarize key papers that have led to significant advances in the field.

Statins associate with better clinical outcomes in chronic hepatitis B patients with HBsAg seroclearance

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to describe long-term clinical outcomes in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients after HBsAg seroclearance, and identify factors that modify disease outcomes.

METHODS

CHB patients with HBsAg seroclearance occurring between 1986 and 2017 were recruited. Primary outcome was cirrhosis/hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and secondary outcomes were hepatic decompensation, liver-related death/transplantation, and all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox model included demographics, prior antivirals, comorbidities, drugs (statins, metformin, proton-pump inhibitors, non-selective beta-blockers), and laboratory parameters (platelet, liver function test, prothrombin time, alpha-fetoprotein [AFP], anti-HBs). Statin users were propensity score matched (PSM) with non-users (1:2 ratio) for survival analysis of all outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 913 patients with HBsAg seroclearance (male: 613 [67.1%]; median age: 53.4 years [18.5-87.0]), 129 (14.1%) were statin users. During median follow-up of 7.7 years (up to 29.1 years), 64/833 (7.7%) developed cirrhosis, 25/905 (2.8%) developed HCC, 3/913 (0.3%) underwent transplantation, and 76/913 (8.3%) died. Statins were associated with lower cirrhosis/HCC risk (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.44; 95% CI 0.20-0.96; aHR for every 1-year increase in use: 0.85; 95% CI 0.75-0.97). Statin users had no hepatic decompensation or liver-related death/transplantation (vs 18/778 [2.3%] and 18/784 [2.3%] cases in statin non-users, respectively). Statins were also associated with lower all-cause mortality risk (aHR: 0.21; 95% CI 0.08-0.53). PSM yields consistent results for beneficial effects of statins (log-rank p < 0.05 for all outcomes). Other factors for cirrhosis/HCC included increasing age (aHR: 1.06), diabetes (aHR: 2.03), higher creatinine (aHR: 1.008), GGT > 50U/L (aHR: 3.25), and AFP > 9 ng/mL (aHR: 10.14).

CONCLUSION

Patients with HBsAg seroclearance have favorable long-term survival. However, liver-related adverse outcomes still develop, necessitating further investigations on beneficial effects of statins.

Interplay of cardiovascular mediators, oxidative stress and inflammation in liver disease and its complications

The liver is a crucial metabolic organ that has a key role in maintaining immune and endocrine homeostasis. Accumulating evidence suggests that chronic liver disease might promote the development of various cardiac disorders (such as arrhythmias and cardiomyopathy) and circulatory complications (including systemic, splanchnic and pulmonary complications), which can eventually culminate in clinical conditions ranging from portal and pulmonary hypertension to pulmonary, cardiac and renal failure, ascites and encephalopathy. Liver diseases can affect cardiovascular function during the early stages of disease progression. The development of cardiovascular diseases in patients with chronic liver failure is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and cardiovascular complications can in turn affect liver function and liver disease progression. Furthermore, numerous infectious, inflammatory, metabolic and genetic diseases, as well as alcohol abuse can also influence both hepatic and cardiovascular outcomes. In this Review, we highlight how chronic liver diseases and associated cardiovascular effects can influence different organ pathologies. Furthermore, we explore the potential roles of inflammation, oxidative stress, vasoactive mediator imbalance, dysregulated endocannabinoid and autonomic nervous systems and endothelial dysfunction in mediating the complex interplay between the liver and the systemic vasculature that results in the development of the extrahepatic complications of chronic liver disease. The roles of ageing, sex, the gut microbiome and organ transplantation in this complex interplay are also discussed.

Non-selective beta-blocker use in cirrhotic patients is associated with a reduced likelihood of hospitalisation for infection

BACKGROUND

Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) reduce enteric bacterial translocation rates and the frequency of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) in animal models.

AIM

To evaluate the effect of NSBBs on infection-related admissions.

METHODS

We performed a case-control study of cirrhotic patients' first in-patient admission between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2016. We examined NSBB use and the development of infection. We performed a propensity score-matched analysis in those with NSBB use vs no use and calculated odds ratios on this matched cohort to determine the odds of outcomes based on NSBB use.

RESULTS

We identified 2165 cirrhotic patients who met our inclusion criteria. Most patients were Caucasian (69%), male (62%). Admission Model for End stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, Charlson comorbidity index and Child-Pugh score were 12 ± 1, 4 ± 2, and 8 ± 2, respectively. Ascites was the most common complication of portal hypertension (44%); 23% of patients used NSBBs at home. Infections occurred in 33% of admissions. In the propensity score-matched cohort, the use of NSBBs at home was associated with lower overall, and specific, infections. The effect was similar in patients taking NSBBs for either primary or secondary oesophageal variceal prophylaxis and for those on NSBBs for other indications. Patients not on NSBBs had higher odds of infection (OR = 2.5), SBP (OR = 4.0), and bacteraemia (OR = 6.0).

CONCLUSION

Home use of NSBBs by patients with cirrhosis was associated with fewer infection-related admissions. The data suggest that NSBBs in this group of patients reduce the risk of infection.

Perceptions on the management of varices and on the use of albumin in patients with cirrhosis among GI specialists in Austria

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension (PH) causes severe complications in patients with liver cirrhosis, such as variceal bleeding and ascites; however, data on the knowledge and perceptions on guideline recommendations for the management of varices and the use of albumin is scarce.

METHODS

We designed two structured surveys on (i) the management of varices and (ii) the use of albumin for Austrian physicians of specialized Gastro-Intestinal (GI) centers. The interviewed physicians were confronted spontaneously and provided ad hoc responses to the questionnaire.

RESULTS

In total, 158 surveys were completed. Interestingly, many specialists (30%) would recommend a follow-up gastroscopy after 1 year in patients with compensated cirrhosis without varices (i.e., overtreatment). For small varices, 81.5% would use non-selective beta blockers (NSBB) for primary prophylaxis (PP). For PP in patients with large varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) plus NSBB was preferred by 51.4% (i.e., overtreatment). Knowledge on the indication criteria for early TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt) was reported by 54.3%, but only 20% could report these criteria correctly. The majority (87.1%) correctly indicated a preference to use NSBB and EBL for secondary prophylaxis (SP). The majority of participating gastroenterologists reported no restrictions on the use of albumin (89.8%) in their hospitals. Of the interviewed specialists, 63.6% would use albumin in patients with SBP; however, only 11.4% would use the doses recommended by guidelines. The majority of specialists indicated using albumin at the recommended doses for hepatorenal syndrome (HRS-AKI, 86.4%) and for large volume paracentesis (LVP, 73.3%). The individual responses regarding albumin use for infections/sepsis, hyponatremia, renal impairment, and encephalopathy were heterogeneous.

CONCLUSION

The reported management of PH and varices is mostly adherent to guidelines, but endoscopic surveillance in patients without varices is too intense and EBL is overused in the setting of PP. Knowledge on the correct use of early TIPS must be improved among Austrian specialists. Albumin use is widely unrestricted in Austria; however, albumin is often underdosed in established indications.

Non-selective beta-blockers impair global circulatory homeostasis and renal function in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The safety of non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) has been questioned in refractory ascites (RA). We studied the effects of NSBBs on cardiac systolic function, systemic hemodynamics, and renal perfusion pressure (RPP) and function in patients with diuretic-responsive ascites (DRA) and RA.

METHODS

We performed a prospective pre-post repeated-measures study in cirrhotic patients, 18 with DRA and 20 with RA on NSBBs for variceal bleeding prophylaxis. Systolic function (by ejection intraventricular pressure difference [EIVPD]), hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), cardiopulmonary pressures, RPP, and sympathetic activation were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks of propranolol.

RESULTS

EIVPD was elevated at baseline (RA 4.5 [2.8-5.7] and DRA 4.2 [3.1-5.7] mmHg; normal 2.4-3.6 mmHg) and directly related to the severity of vasodilation and sympathetic activation. NSBBs led to similar reductions in heart rate and HVPG in both groups. NSBBs reduced EIPVD in RA but not in DRA (-20% vs. -2%, p <0.01). In RA, the NSBB-induced reduction in EIPVD correlated with the severity of vasodilation and with higher plasma nitric oxide, norepinephrine and IL-6 (r >0.40, all p <0.05). NSBBs reduced RPP in both groups, but impaired renal function only in patients with RA. Reduced EIPVD correlated with decreases in RPP and estimated glomerular filtration rate (r >0.40, all p <0.01). After NSBB treatment, RPP dropped below the threshold of renal flow autoregulation in 11 of the 20 (55%) patients with RA, including the 4 fulfilling the criteria for HRS-AKI.

CONCLUSION

Renal perfusion and function depend critically on systolic function and sympathetic hyperactivation in RA. NSBBs blunt the sympathetic overdrive, hamper cardiac output, lower RPP below the critical threshold and impair renal function. β-blockade should be used cautiously or even avoided in patients with RA.

LAY SUMMARY

We have identified the mechanisms by which non-selective beta-blockers could impair survival in patients with refractory ascites. We show that peripheral vasodilation and sympathetic activation lead to increased left ventricle systolic function in patients with cirrhosis and ascites, which acts as an adaptive mechanism to maintain renal perfusion. When ascites becomes refractory, this compensatory cardiac response to vasodilation is critically dependent on sympathetic hyperactivation and is hardly able to maintain renal perfusion. In this setting, β-blockade blunts the sympathetic overdrive of cardiac function, hampers cardiac output, lowers renal perfusion pressure below the critical threshold and impairs renal function.