Predictive value of the variceal pressure response to continued pharmacological therapy in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension

Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient: Measurement and Pitfalls

Measurement of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) effectively mirrors the severity of portal hypertension (PH) and offers valuable insights into prognosis of liver disease, including the risk of decompensation and mortality. Additionally, HVPG offers crucial information about treatment response to nonselective beta-blockers and other medications, with its utility demonstrated in clinical trials in patients with PH. Despite the widespread dissemination and validation of noninvasive tests, HVPG still holds a significant role in hepatology. Physicians treating patients with liver diseases should comprehend the HVPG measurement procedure, its applications, and how to interpret the results and potential pitfalls.

The evaluation of portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients with spectral computed tomography

BACKGROUND

Iodine concentrations measured using dual-energy spectral CT (DESCT) have been recently proposed as providing good performance for examining tissues hemodynamics.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of DESCT-derived parameters in evaluating portal venous pressure in patients with liver cirrhosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 71 patients with liver cirrhosis who underwent percutaneous transhepatic portal vein puncture procedures were included in this study. All participants underwent DESCT and gastrointestinal endoscopy within one month before the operation. The direct portal venous pressure of each participant was measured preoperatively.

RESULTS

Stepwise multivariate linear regression analysis showed that the iodine concentrations in the portal vein and hepatic parenchyma during the portal venous phase and the platelet count were independently correlated with the direct portal venous pressure (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.030, respectively). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that the normalized iodine concentration of the hepatic parenchyma had the best performance for identifying clinically significant portal hypertension (≥10 mmHg), esophageal varices, and high-risk esophageal varices (the area under the curve values were 0.951, 0.932, and 0.960, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The normalized iodine concentration of the hepatic parenchyma is a reliable parameter to non-invasively assess portal venous pressure in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Review article: controversies surrounding the use of carvedilol and other beta blockers in the management of portal hypertension and cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Advanced chronic liver disease is an increasing cause of premature morbidity and mortality in the UK. Portal hypertension is the primary driver of decompensation, including the development of ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and variceal haemorrhage. Non-selective beta blockers (NSBB) reduce portal pressure and are well established in the prevention of variceal haemorrhage. Carvedilol, a newer NSBB, is more effective at reducing portal pressure due to additional α-adrenergic blockade and has additional anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-fibrotic effects.

AIM

To summarise the available evidence on the use of beta blockers, specifically carvedilol, in cirrhosis, focussing on when and why to start METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed for relevant publications.

RESULTS

International guidelines advise the use of NSBB in primary prophylaxis against variceal haemorrhage in those with high-risk varices, with substantial evidence of efficacy comparable with endoscopic band ligation (EBL). NSBB are also well established in secondary prophylaxis, in combination with EBL. More controversial is their use in patients without large varices, but with clinically significant portal hypertension. However, there is gathering evidence that NSBB, particularly carvedilol, reduce the risk of decompensation and improve survival. While caution is advised in patients with advanced cirrhosis and refractory ascites, recent evidence suggests that NSBB can continue to be used safely, and that premature discontinuation may be detrimental.

CONCLUSIONS

With increasing evidence of benefit independent of variceal bleeding, namely retardation of decompensation and improvement in survival, it is time to consider whether carvedilol should be offered to all patients with advanced chronic liver disease.

Noninvasive Assessment of Portal Hypertension Using Spectral Computed Tomography

BACKGROUND

Early diagnosis of portal hypertension is imperative for timely treatment to reduce the mortality rate. However, there is still no adequate method to noninvasively and accurately assess the portal hypertension in routine clinical practice.

PURPOSE

We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of parameters measured using dual energy spectral computed tomography (LightSpeed CT750 HD) in assessing portal venous pressure in patients with liver cirrhosis.

STUDY

Forty-five patients with liver cirrhosis who underwent percutaneous transhepatic portal vein puncture as part of their treatment for liver disease were enrolled in this study. Measurement of direct portal venous pressure was performed preoperatively. All patients underwent dual energy spectral computed tomography within 3 days before their operations.

RESULTS

The iodine concentrations of portal vein and hepatic parenchyma during the portal venous phase and the alanine aminotransferase level were found to be independently correlated with the direct portal venous pressure according to stepwise multivariate linear regression analysis (P<0.001, 0.004, and 0.024, respectively). In a receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the receiver operating characteristic of iodine concentrations of the portal vein (ICPV) for identifying clinically significant portal hypertension (≥10 mm Hg) was significantly higher than that of iodine concentrations of hepatic parenchyma (ICliver) and the alanine aminotransferase level (0.944, 0.825, and 0.301, respectively). The threshold ICPV of 58.27 yielded a sensitivity of 93.8%, specificity of 69.2%, positive predictive value of 88.2%, and negative predictive value of 81.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

ICPV values may be a useful tool in noninvasively assessing the portal venous pressure and identifying clinically significant portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis.

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.

Correlation and prognostic accuracy between noninvasive liver fibrosismarkers and portal pressure in cirrhosis: Role of ALBI score

BACKGROUND

The role of noninvasive liver fibrosis markers which were developed to evaluate the severity of chronic liver disease remains unclear in cirrhosis.

AIMS

To evaluate the correlation between noninvasive markers and hemodynamic parameters and their prognostic performance in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

A total of 242 cirrhotic patients undergoing hemodynamic study were analyzed. The correlations between noninvasive models, including FIB-4, aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index, cirrhosis discriminant score, Lok index, Goteborg University Cirrhosis Index, and albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score and hemodynamic parameters were investigated, along with their predictive accuracy for short- and long-term survival.

RESULTS

There was a significant correlation between all noninvasive markers and hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), and ALBI score had the best correlation (r = 0.307, p<0.001). For the prediction of 3-month and 6-month mortality, serum sodium (sNa) levels had the highest area under curve (AUC; 0.799 and 0.818, respectively) among all parameters, and ALBI score showed the best performance (AUC = 0.691 and 0.740, respectively) compared with other 5 noninvasive models. Of 159 patients with low MELD scores (<14), high ALBI score (>-1.4) and low sNa (<135 mmol/L) predicted early mortality. In the Cox multivariate model, ALBI, MELD, HVPG and sNa were independent predictors of long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Among noninvasive markers, ALBI score is best correlated with HVPG and associated with short-term outcome in cirrhotic patients. A high ALBI score and low sNa identify high-risk patients with low MELD scores. High MELD, HVPG, ALBI and low sNa levels are independent predictors of survival. Independent studies are required to confirm our findings.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

β-2 Adrenergic receptor gene polymorphism and response to propranolol in cirrhosis

AIM: To evaluate the association of β-2 adrenergic receptor (β₂-AR) gene polymorphism with response of variceal pressure to propranolol in cirrhosis.

METHODS: Sixty-four non-related cirrhotic patients participated in this study and accepted variceal pressure measurement before and after propranolol administration. Polymorphism of the β₂-AR gene was determined by directly sequencing of the polymerase chain reaction products from the DNA samples that were prepared from the patients.

RESULTS: The prevalence of Gly16-Glu/Gln27 and Arg16-Gln27 homozygotes, and compound heterozygotes was 29.7%, 10.9%, and 59.4%, respectively. Patients with cirrhosis with Gly16-Glu/Gln27 homozygotes had a greater decrease of variceal pressure after propranolol administration than those with Arg16-Gln27 homozygotes or with compound heterozygotes (22.4% ± 2.1%, 13.1% ± 2.7% and 12.5% ± 3.1%, respectively, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: The variceal pressure response to propranolol was associated with polymorphism of β₂-AR gene. Patients with the Gly¹⁶-Glu/Gln²⁷ homozygotes probably benefit from propranolol therapy.

Effect of intravariceal sclerotherapy combined with esophageal mucosal sclerotherapy using small-volume sclerosant for cirrhotic patients with high variceal pressure

AIM: To explore the effect of intravariceal-mucosal sclerotherapy using small dose of sclerosant on the recurrence of esophageal varices.

METHODS: We randomly assigned 38 cirrhotic patients with previous variceal bleeding and high variceal pressure (> 15.2 mmHg) to receive endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) and combined intravariceal and esophageal mucosal sclerotherapy (combined group) using small-volume sclerosant. The end-points of the study were rebleeding and recurrence of esophageal varices.

RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 16 mo, varices recurred in 1 patient in the combined group as compared with 7 patients in the EVL group (P = 0.045). Rebleeding occurred in 3 patients in the EVL group as compared with 1 patient in the combined group (P = 0.687). No patient died in the two groups. No significant differences were observed between the two groups with respect to serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION: Intravariceal-mucosal sclerotherapy using small dose of sclerosant is more effective than EVL in decreasing the incidence of variceal recurrence for cirrhotic patients.

Effects of propranolol or propranolol plus isosorbide-5-mononitrate on variceal pressure in schistosomiasis

AIM: To compare the effects of propranolol (PR) to that of PR plus isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN) on variceal pressure in patients with schistosomiasis.

METHODS: Forty-eight patients with schistosomiasis who had no previous variceal bleeding were treated with PR alone or PR plus ISMN. Seven patients refused variceal pressure manometry (3 receiving PR and 4 receiving PR plus ISMN). One patient withdrew from the trial due to headache after taking ISMN. At the time of termination, twenty patients were randomly assigned to treatment with PR plus ISMN or PR alone. The dose of PR was adjusted until the resting heart rate had been reduced by 25% or was less than 55 bpm. In the PR plus ISMN group, after PR was titrated to the same target, the dose of ISMN was increased up to 20 mg orally twice a day. Variceal pressure was measured using a noninvasive endoscopic balloon technique at the end of the 6-mo treatment period.

RESULTS: In 40 patients (20 in the PR group and 20 in the PR plus ISMN group), variceal pressure was measured before treatment and at the end of the 6-mo treatment period. PR or PR plus ISMN treatment caused a significant reduction in variceal pressure (PR group: from 24.15 ± 6.05 mmHg to 22.68 ± 5.70 mmHg, P = 0.001; PR plus ISMN group: from 25.69 ± 5.26 mmHg to 20.48 ± 5.43 mmHg; P < 0.001). The percentage decrease in variceal pressure was significant after PR plus ISMN compared with that after PR alone (15.93% ± 8.37% vs 6.05% ± 3.67%, P = 0.01). One patient in the PR plus ISMN group and two patients in the PR group had variceal bleeding during follow-up. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the incidence of variceal bleeding. In the PR plus ISMN group, three patients had headache and hypotension. The headache was mild and transient and promptly disappeared after continuation of the relevant drug in two patients. Only one patient withdrew from the trial due to severe and lasting headache after taking ISMN. No side effects occurred in the PR group.

CONCLUSION: PR plus ISMN therapy may be an alternative treatment for patients with schistosomiasis who have a high risk of bleeding.

Hemodynamic response to propranolol in patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus-related cirrhosis after liver transplantation: a case-control study

Cirrhosis recurrence is frequent after orthotopic liver transplantation for hepatitis C virus (HCV). Because transplantation causes liver denervation, we hypothesized that the response to propranolol might differ in transplant patients versus nontransplant patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Twenty-one patients with cirrhosis recurrence after orthotopic liver transplantation with portal hypertension were compared to 20 nontransplant patients with cirrhosis, HCV, and portal hypertension, and they were matched by sex, age, presence of varices, and Child-Pugh score. The patients underwent systemic and hepatic hemodynamic measurements at the baseline and 20 minutes after intravenous propranolol (0.15 mg/kg). At the baseline, the transplant patients with cirrhosis had a lower hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) than the nontransplant patients with cirrhosis (14.8 ± 2.9 versus 17.3 ± 4.4 mm Hg, P = 0.03) but a higher mean arterial pressure (MAP; 100.3 ± 12.3 versus 91.8 ± 11.6 mm Hg, P = 0.04) and higher systemic vascular resistance (2253 ± 573 versus 1883 ± 525 dyn/second/cm(-5) , P = 0.03). There were no differences in the cardiac index (CI). Propranolol significantly decreased HVPG to similar extents in transplant patients and nontransplant patients with cirrhosis (-14.1% ± 8.0% versus -16.9% ± 9.5%, P > 0.99). MAP tended to increase in transplant patients with cirrhosis, whereas it slightly decreased in nontransplant patients (5.1% ± 14.2% versus -4.8% ± 6.4%, P = 0.007); however, the reduction in CI was less marked in transplant patients with cirrhosis (-18.6% ± 7.6% versus -26.9% ± 9.0%, P = 0.005). In conclusion, patients with HCV-related cirrhosis and portal hypertension after orthotopic liver transplantation have lower baseline HVPG values but similar HVPG responses to propranolol infusions in comparison with nontransplant patients with cirrhosis. In contrast to nontransplant patients, propranolol increases the systemic vascular resistance and arterial pressure in transplant patients with cirrhosis and attenuates the fall in CI.

Measurement of variceal pressure with a computerized endoscopic manometry: validation and effect of propranolol therapy in cirrhotic patients

Background and Purpose

Recently, we invented a computerized endoscopic balloon manometry (CEBM) to measure variceal pressure (VP) in cirrhotic patient. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability and feasibility of this method, and whether this technique provided further information to pharmacological therapy.

Patients and Methods

VP measurements were performed in 83 cirrhotic patients and compared with HVPG as well as endoscopic bleeding risk parameters. Furthermore, VP was assessed before and during propranolol therapy in 30 patients without previous bleeding.

Results

VP measurements were successful in 96% (83/86) of all patients. Of the 83 patients, the VP correlated closely with the HVPG (P<0.001). The presence of red colour signs and the size of varices were strongly associated with VP. Patients with previous bleeding had higher VP than those who had not yet experienced bleeding. In univariate analysis, the level of VP, the size of varices, and red color signs predicted a higher risk of bleeding. The multiple logistic regression model revealed that VP was the major risk factor for bleeding. In 30 patients receiving propranolol, VP significantly decreased from 21.1±3.5 mmHg before therapy to 18.1±3.3 mmHg after 3 months and to 16.3±4.0 mmHg after 6 months. Comparing the mean decrease in VP with that in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), the decrease in VP was more obvious than HVPG response to propranolol.

Conclusions

This study showed that CEBM is safe and practical to assess VP in cirrhotic patient. It has the potential to be used as a clinical method to assess the risk of variceal bleeding and the effects of pharmacological therapy.

Trial registration

Effect of vasoactive drugs on esophageal variceal hemodynamics in patients with portal hypertension. Chinese Clinical Trial Registry –TRC-08000252.

New therapeutic paradigm for patients with cirrhosis

Cirrhosis is a major health problem, being the 5th cause of death in the U.K. and 12th in the U.S., but 4th in the 45 to 54 age group. Until recently cirrhosis was considered a single and terminal disease stage, with an inevitably poor prognosis. However, it is now clear that 1-year mortality can range from 1% in early cirrhosis to 57% in decompensated disease. As the only treatment for advanced cirrhosis is liver transplantation, what is urgently needed is strategies to prevent transition to decompensated stages. The evidence we present in this review clearly demonstrates that management of patients with cirrhosis should change from an expectant algorithm that treats complications as they occur, to preventing the advent of all complications while in the compensated phase. This requires maintaining patients in an asymptomatic phase and not significantly affecting their quality of life with minimal impairment due to the therapies themselves. This could be achieved with lifestyle changes and combinations of already licensed and low-cost drugs, similar to the paradigm of treating risk factors for cardiovascular disease. The drugs are propranolol, simvastatin, norfloxacin, and warfarin, which in combination would cost £128/patient annually-equivalent to U.S. $196/year. This treatment strategy requires randomized controlled trials to establish improvements in outcomes. In the 21st century, cirrhosis should be regarded as a potentially treatable disease with currently available and inexpensive therapies.

Venous thromboembolism in cirrhosis

The cirrhosis population represents a unique subset of patients who are at risk for both bleeding and developing venous thromboembolic events (VTEs). It has been commonly misunderstood that these patients are naturally protected from thrombosis by deficiencies in coagulation factors. As a result, the cirrhosis population is often falsely perceived to be "autoanticoagulated." However, the concept of "autoanticoagulation" conferring protection from thrombosis is a misnomer. While patients with cirrhosis may have a bleeding predisposition, not uncommonly they also experience thrombotic events. The concern for this increased bleeding risk often makes anticoagulation a difficult choice. Prophylactic and therapeutic management of VTE in patients with cirrhosis is a difficult clinical problem with the lack of clear established guidelines. The elucidation of laboratory and/or clinical predictors of VTE will be useful in this setting. This review serves to examine VTE and the use of anticoagulation in the cirrhosis population.

Management of special conditions in patients on vitamin K antagonists

Physicians are occasionally faced with difficult situations in the management of vitamin K antagonists (VKA) due to the lack of sound data available in controlled studies on certain conditions. In this review we would like to address some special but frequent conditions that can be encountered in daily clinical practice. These include the use of VKA in hemodialysis, thromboembolism in patients with liver cirrhosis and the thromboembolic risk in patients who bleed in the course of treatment with VKA. Moreover, two other conditions were examined: what the best way of expressing prothrombin time would be in patients with liver disease and how to behave when a patient treated with VKA shows a subtherapeutic INR. These topics were discussed by a panel of experts during a workshop recently held in Milan by the Italian Federation of Centres for the Diagnosis of Thrombosis and the Surveillance of Antithrombotic Therapies (FCSA). The main aim of the workshop was to provide helpful and practical advice to physicians in the daily management of VKA.

Use of portal pressure studies in the management of variceal haemorrhage

Portal hypertension occurs as a complication of liver cirrhosis and complications such as variceal bleeding lead to significant demands on resources. Endoscopy is the gold standard method for screening cirrhotic patients however universal endoscopic screening may mean a lot of unnecessary procedures as the presence of oesophageal varices is variable hence a large time and cost burden on endoscopy units to carry out both screening and subsequent follow up of variceal bleeds. A less invasive method to identify those at high risk of bleeding would allow earlier prophylactic measures to be applied. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is an acceptable indirect measurement of portal hypertension and predictor of the complications of portal hypertension in adult cirrhotics. Varices develop at a HVPG of 10-12 mmHg with the appearance of other complications with HPVG > 12 mmHg. Variceal bleeding does not occur in pressures under 12 mmHg. HPVG > 20 mmHg measured early after admission is a significant prognostic indicator of failure to control bleeding varices, indeed early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in such circumstances reduces mortality significantly. HVPG can be used to identify responders to medical therapy. Patients who do not achieve the suggested reduction targets in HVPG have a high risk of rebleeding despite endoscopic ligation and may not derive significant overall mortality benefit from endoscopic intervention alone, ultimately requiring TIPS or liver transplantation. Early HVPG measurements following a variceal bleed can help to identify those at risk of treatment failure who may benefit from early intervention with TIPS. Therefore, we suggest using HVPG measurement as the investigation of choice in those with confirmed cirrhosis in place of endoscopy for intitial variceal screening and, where indicated, a trial of B-blockade, either intravenously during the initial pressure study with assessment of response or oral therapy with repeat HVPG six weeks later. In those with elevated pressures, primary medical prophylaxis could be commenced with subsequent close monitoring of HVPG thus negating the need for endoscopy at this point. All patients presenting with variceal haemorrhage should undergo HVPG measurement and those with a gradient greater than 20 mmHg should be considered for early TIPS. By introducing portal pressure studies into a management algorithm for variceal bleeding, the number of endoscopies required for further intervention and follow up can be reduced leading to significant savings in terms of cost and demand on resources.

The effects of sorafenib on the portal hypertensive syndrome in patients with liver cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma--a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Increased intrahepatic vascular resistance and hyperperfusion in the splanchnic circulation are the principal mechanisms leading to portal hypertension in cirrhosis. Several preclinical studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect of the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib on the portal hypertensive syndrome.

AIM

To investigate the effect of sorafenib on hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), systemic hemodynamics and intrahepatic mRNA expression of proangiogenic, profibrogenic and proinflammatory genes.

METHODS

Patients with liver fibrosis/cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma were treated with sorafenib 400 mg b.d. HVPG measurement and transjugular liver biopsy were performed at baseline and at week 2. Changes in HVPG and intrahepatic mRNA expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), RhoA, tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and placental growth factor (PlGF) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (m/f = 12/1; Child-Pugh class A/B = 10/3) were included. The most common aetiology of liver disease was alcohol consumption (n = 7). Eleven patients had an elevated portal pressure, including eight patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. A significant decrease of HVPG (≥ 20% from baseline) was observed in four subjects. In HVPG responders, we observed mRNA downregulation of VEGF, PDGF, PlGF, RhoA kinase and TNF-α, while no substantial mRNA decrease was found in nonresponders in any of the five genes. In two of the four HVPG responders we observed a dramatic (43-85%) mRNA decrease of all five investigated genes.

CONCLUSION

Larger controlled clinical trials are needed to demonstrate any potential beneficial effect of sorafenib on portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis.

Should we routinely measure portal pressure in patients with cirrhosis, using hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) as a guide for prophylaxis and therapy of bleeding and rebleeding? No

Portal hypertension (PH) is a severe complication of liver cirrhosis. Measurement of the degree of portal hypertension is usually performed by measuring the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) which is the difference between the free hepatic venous pressure (FHVP) and the wedged hepatic venous pressure (WHPG). The HVPG accurately reflects the degree of PH in the majority of liver diseases. PH is defined by an increase of HVPG values above the normal upper limit of 5 mm Hg, while clinically significant PH is defined by an HVPG to ≥10 mm Hg. Although measurement of HVPG potentially has several applications, in clinical practice its major use has been related to the assessment of hemodynamic response to pharmacological therapy, in order to evaluate the efficacy of treatment and to predict the risk of rebleeding from esophageal varices. When properly performed, HVPG is a reliable, safe and good predictive tool in the management of portal hypertension. However, the need for appropriate equipment, sufficient and reliable operators and costs, have discouraged its use outside Liver Units specifically devoted to the clinical management of portal hypertension. This has diminished its applicability. Combining its use with transjugular liver biopsy and using the prognostic value of HVPG may help encourage its use.

Clinical pharmacology of portal hypertension

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

Right atrial pressure is not adequate to calculate portal pressure gradient in cirrhosis: a clinical-hemodynamic correlation study

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), the difference between wedge and free hepatic venous pressure, is the preferred method for estimating portal pressure. However, it has been suggested that hepatic atrial pressure gradient (HAPG)--the gradient between wedge hepatic venous pressure and right atrial pressure (RAP)--might better reflect variceal hemodynamics. The aim of this study was to (1) investigate whether HAPG with nonselective beta-blockers correlates with prognosis in cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension at baseline and during treatment; (2) compare the prognostic value of HAPG with that of HVPG; and (3) investigate the agreement between portoatrial gradient (PAG) and portocaval gradient (PCG) in patients with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). We included 154 cirrhotic patients with varices with a complete hemodynamic study at baseline and on chronic treatment for primary (n = 71) or secondary (n = 83) prophylaxis for bleeding and 99 patients with TIPS. All patients were followed for up to 2 years; portal hypertensive-related bleeding and bleeding-free survival were analyzed. HVPG was equal or lower than HAPG in all patients (-3.2 mm Hg; P < 0.001). Agreement between HAPG and HVPG was modest, especially in patients with increased intra-abdominal pressure. One hundred two patients were HVPG nonresponders and 52 patients were HVPG responders to nonselective beta-blockers, whereas 101 patients were HAPG nonresponders and 53 patients were HAPG responders (k = 0.610). HVPG response revealed an excellent predictive value for bleeding risk and bleeding-free survival; HAPG did not. In our TIPS patients, 20% had a PCG < or =12 mm Hg and a PAG >12 mm Hg, which may have induced unnecessary overdilation of the TIPS.

CONCLUSION

The excellent prognostic information provided by HVPG response to drug therapy is lost if HAPG response is considered. RAP should not be used for the calculation of portal pressure gradient in patients with cirrhosis.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIM

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

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Role of endoscopy in primary prophylaxis for esophageal variceal bleeding

Cirrhosis is the leading cause of portal hypertension in the Western world. From a clinical standpoint, the most significant consequence of portal hypertension is the development of esophageal varices. Despite the many advances in the management of variceal bleeding, it remains a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. Primary prophylaxis to prevent the first bleeding episode in patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices is therefore critically important in the management of patients with cirrhosis.

Non invasive diagnosis of portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients

The measure of disease progression in chronic liver disease represents a key challenge in any of the different stages of evolution. Indeed, a correct and reliable measure of the stage of the disease has relevant implications for assessing the effectiveness of the current therapeutic regimens and for predicting the occurrence of complication. Accordingly, a current major effort is directed at evaluating methodologies characterized by no or low invasiveness to be employed as clinical discriminators in patients populations potentially requiring invasive assessment. This appears particularly relevant in patients with compensated cirrhosis, where the only reference standard is the measurement of portal pressure by hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). In this particular context, transient elastography (TE) appears to be promising and needs to be further investigated, possibly in combination with other non-invasive methodologies such as serum markers algorithms and/or imaging techniques. On the other hand, the application of non-invasive methods for monitoring the response to vasoactive treatment for the reduction of portal pressure and the prevention of related complications seems at the moment not realistic.

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

BACKGROUND/AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Hepatic venous pressure gradient: worth another look?

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

Hyperfibrinolysis in liver disease

The incidence of hyperfibrinolysis in patients with cirrhosis is still debated. The reasons for this uncertainty probably lie in the lack of appropriate laboratory tests for its evaluation. There is a relative consensus, however, that hyperfibrinolysis can complicate the clinical course of liver cirrhosis, especially in cases of moderate to severe liver failure. Hyperfibrinolysis correlates positively with the severity of underlying liver disease, and low-grade systemic fibrinolysis is found in 30% to 46% of patients who have end-stage liver disease. Accelerated intravascular coagulation with secondary hyperfibrinolysis has been reported in patients who have liver failure. Hyperfibrinolysis may delay primary hemostasis, thereby aggravating variceal bleeding and facilitating recurrence.

Review article: the therapeutic and prognostic benefit of portal pressure reduction in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement is not a routinely used technique, despite its therapeutic and prognostic value.

AIM

To review the role of HVPG from published literature.

METHODS

Systematic literature review.

RESULTS

In acute variceal bleeding, HVPG is prognostic identifying 'difficult to treat' group, which now has defined clinical correlations. In secondary prevention of portal hypertensive bleeding, a reduction to < or = 12 mmHg confers near complete protection against rebleeding. The target of > or = 20% HVPG reduction from baseline needs prospective assessment to test a change of therapy, if no reduction occurs. The acute HVPG response to beta-blockade needs further assessment. In primary prevention, the cost-effectiveness of HVPG measurement is not favourable given the efficacy of medical therapy. In chronic liver disease, wedge hepatic venous pressure (WHVP) is prognostic for survival. Pharmacological reduction in portal pressure decreases complications and improves survival, possibly independent of a concomitant improvement in liver function. This latter requires urgent confirmation as it is clinically very relevant. HVPG monitoring can be used to assess anti-viral therapy particularly in cirrhosis, ergonomically combined with transjugular biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognostic and therapeutic value of HVPG is established beyond portal hypertensive bleeding for which there are some clinical surrogates. HVPG measurement should now be part of everyday clinical practice.

Primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhosis

Variceal bleeding is a common and severe complication of liver cirrhosis. The risk of bleeding increases with the size of varices, red wheal marks and disease severity. Noninvasive tests are not accurate enough for the diagnosis of varices, so all patients with cirrhosis should be screened by endoscopy. Nonselective beta-blockers (propranolol, nadolol) are indicated for primary prophylaxis in patients with medium/large varices, and for those with small varices and red signs or advanced liver failure (Child C). In such patients, beta-blockers have been shown to reduce the risk of bleeding from 25 to 15%. There is no evidence to support using beta-blockers with nitrates or spironolactone. In patients with contraindication or intolerance to beta-blockers, endoscopic band ligations are indicated.

Current Management of Sinusoidal Portal Hypertension

Portal hypertension resulting from cirrhosis was one of the biggest challenges faced by general surgeons up until the past two decades. The management of portal hypertensive variceal hemorrhage has undergone dramatic changes during this period. Endoscopic variceal ligation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts are currently used with great success. The degree of liver dysfunction remains the most important determinant of outcome in these patients. Patients with cirrhosis who have good liver function and recurrent variceal bleed remain candidates for shunt surgery. However, the need for surgical intervention has become a rarity. The success of liver transplantation has ensured that portal hypertension is cured permanently and one does not often see the critically ill and decompensated patient with cirrhosis on the surgical service. A review of the current treatment options in this very ill patient population is the primary focus of this article.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient and outcomes in cirrhosis

End-stage liver disease is characterized by the development of complications related to portal hypertension. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), as an estimation of portal pressure, has been associated to the development of these complications. Most of the data that has been published in this regard is in the context of the development of varices and variceal bleeding. However, HVPG has also been associated to the development or the outcome of other complications of portal hypertension, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver transplantation, and survival. This review analyses the published data regarding the association between the HVPG and the different possible outcomes in cirrhosis.

Correlation and comparison of the model for end-stage liver disease, portal pressure, and serum sodium for outcome prediction in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), and serum sodium (SNa) are important prognostic markers for patients with liver cirrhosis. The correlation among these markers and their predictive accuracy for survival are unclear.

METHODS

A total of 213 cirrhotic patients undergoing hemodynamic measurement were analyzed. The correlations between MELD score, SNa, and hemodynamic parameters were investigated.

RESULTS

There was a significant correlation between MELD and HVPG (r=0.255, P<0.001), between SNa and MELD (r=-0.483, P<0.001), and between HVPG and SNa (r=-0.213, P=0.002). Using mortality as the end-point, the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for MELD was 0.789, compared with 0.659 for HVPG (P=0.165) and 0.860 for SNa (P=0.34) at 3 months; the difference between HVPG and SNa was significant (P=0.015). The AUC at 6 months was significantly higher for SNa and MELD compared with that of HVPG. Among 134 patients with low (<14) MELD scores, a high (>16 mm Hg) HVPG, and low SNa (<135 mEq/L) predicted early mortality. In the Cox multivariate model, MELD, HVPG, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores were consistently identified as independent poor prognostic predictors when they were treated either as dichotomous or continuous variables in the model.

CONCLUSIONS

MELD score is closely associated with HVPG and SNa in cirrhotic patients. HVPG is not superior to MELD score or SNa for short-term outcome prediction. High HVPG and low SNa may identify high-risk patients with low MELD scores. High MELD, HVPG, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh scores are independent predictors of poor long-term survival.

Value of the hepatic venous pressure gradient to monitor drug therapy for portal hypertension: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The use of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) to assess the efficacy of the pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension in cirrhosis is controversial. Our aim was to establish whether target HVPG reduction predicts variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients receiving variceal bleeding prophylaxis.

METHODS

Data sources were MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, citation lists, and abstracts (most recent search March 2006). Cohorts of patients on drug therapy from randomized and nonrandomized studies correlating variceal bleeding and HVPG change were used. Heterogeneity was explored by metaregression analysis.

RESULTS

Ten studies totaling 595 patients undergoing two HVPG measurements were identified. The RR of bleeding was lower in patients achieving an overall (HVPG <or=12 mmHg or decrease >or=20%) (0.27, 95% CI 0.14-0.52), complete (HVPG <or=12 mmHg) (0.48, CI 0.28-0.81), or partial (HVPG decrease >or=20%) (0.41, CI 0.20-0.81) response, with significant heterogeneity. Regression analysis identified the interval between the HVPG measurements significantly associated with the RR of bleeding. Heterogeneity was no longer significant after exclusion of an outlier trial, which showed the longest interval to HVPG remeasurement and the lowest quality score. Even considering nonvaluable patients because of bleeding as HVPG responders, the RR of bleeding was lower in overall responders than in nonresponders (0.66, CI 0.51-0.86). Overall response was associated with lower liver-related mortality (RR 0.58, CI 0.37-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the validity of HVPG end points to monitor drug therapy efficacy for variceal bleeding prophylaxis. HVPG monitoring also provides valuable prognostic information.

Model for end-stage liver disease score to serum sodium ratio index as a prognostic predictor and its correlation with portal pressure in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The models for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and serum sodium (SNa) are important prognostic markers in cirrhosis. A novel index, MELD to SNa ratio (MESO), was developed to amplify the opposing effect of MELD and SNa on outcome prediction.

METHODS

A total of 213 cirrhotic patients undergoing hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The MESO index correlated with HVPG (r=0.258, P<0.001) and Child-Pugh score (rho=0.749, P<0.001). Using mortality as the end point, the area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.860 for SNa, 0.795 for the MESO index and 0.789 for MELD (P values all >0.3) at 3 months. Among patients with Child-Pugh class A or B, the MESO index had a significantly higher AUC compared with MELD (0.80 vs. 0.766, P<0.001). A MESO index <1.6 identified 97% of patients who survived at 3 months and the predicted survival rate was 96.5%. In survival analysis, MESO index >1.6 independently predicted a higher mortality rate (relative risk: 3.32, P<0001) using the Cox model.

CONCLUSIONS

The MESO index, which takes into account the predictive power of both MELD and SNa, is a useful prognostic predictor for both short- and long-term survival in cirrhotic patients.

The extent of the collateral circulation influences the postprandial increase in portal pressure in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

In cirrhosis, repeated flares of portal pressure and collateral blood flow provoked by postprandial hyperaemia may contribute to variceal dilation and rupture.

AIM

To examine the effect of the extent of the collateral circulation on the postprandial increase in portal pressure observed in cirrhosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), hepatic blood flow and azygos blood flow were measured in 64 patients with cirrhosis before and after a standard liquid meal.

RESULTS

Peak increases in HVPG (median+14.9%), hepatic blood flow (median+25.4%), and azygos blood flow (median+32.2%) occurred at 30 min after the meal. Compared with patients with marked postprandial increase in HVPG (above the median, n = 32), those showing mild (<15%, n = 32) increase in HVPG had a higher baseline azygos flow (p<0.01) and underwent a greater postprandial increase in azygos flow (p<0.02). Hepatic blood flow increased similarly in both groups. Postprandial increases in HVPG were inversely correlated (p<0.001) with both baseline azygos flow (r = -0.69) and its postprandial increase (r = -0.72). Food intake increased nitric oxide products in the azygos (p<0.01), but not in the hepatic vein. Large varices (p<0.01) and previous variceal bleeding (p<0.001) were more frequent in patients with mild increase in HVPG.

CONCLUSIONS

Postprandial hyperaemia simultaneously increases HVPG and collateral flow. The extent of the collateral circulation determines the HVPG response to food intake. Patients with extensive collateralisation show less pronounced postprandial increases in HVPG, but associated with marked flares in collateral flow. Collateral vessels preserve their ability to dilate in response to increased blood flow.

The transjugular route: the key hole to the liver world

Portal hypertensive complications are major causes of morbidity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. The advent of the transjugular route with its minimal access allows non-surgical management of portal hypertension, therapy of venous complications of liver transplantation, monitoring of therapy for portal hypertension, hepatic venous pressure gradient and is also the major route to treat hepatic venous obstruction syndromes. In addition, the transjugular route is a safe route to perform a liver biopsy (transjugular liver biopsy) and allows retrograde evaluation of the portal vein. All these procedures can be combined in the same session. These hepatic interventional radiological skills should be incorporated into the expertise of the liver team in specialised hepatological centres, particularly in liver transplant centres as they are especially useful in improving outcomes of cirrhotic patients on the liver transplantation waiting list. A limitation in achieving this goal, could be the number of experienced radiologists, but hepatologists can be trained, at least for the most simple procedures (transjugular liver biopsy and hepatic venous pressure gradient). This would allow wider applicability and use of these diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, all through a 2 mm hole in the neck--the key hole to the liver world.

Prevention of the development of varices and first portal hypertensive bleeding episode

Variceal bleeding is a serious complication in patients with cirrhosis. Although bleeding related mortality rates have fallen recently, it continues to be amongst the leading causes of death. Cirrhotics should be screened for varices at diagnosis. Data on preventing formation/growth of oesophageal varices (pre-primary prophylaxis) are conflicting, with insufficient evidence to use beta-blockers. In order to prevent first bleeding, there is strong evidence in patients with medium/large size oesophageal varices that either non-selective beta-blockers or banding ligation can be used. Banding is superior with respect to bleeding but mortality is similar. Non-selective beta-blockers should remain first line treatment being effective, cheap and without serious complications. In contrast banding ligation is more expensive, requires specialised staff, cannot prevent bleeding from portal hypertensive gastropathy and can cause iatrogenic bleeding. Patients with small varices, particularly if they have progressive liver disease also benefit from beta-blockers, but fewer studies confirm this therapeutic approach.

Prognosis in patients with cirrhosis and mild portal hypertension

OBJECTIVE

Sixty to 70% of upper gastrointestinal bleeding episodes in patients with cirrhosis are caused by oesophageal varices. Prophylaxis is indicated in patients with varices and a hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) above 12 mmHg. The study of the natural history of patients with lower HVPG has been sparse. In this study, long-term survival and the risk of complications in mild portal hypertension were analysed.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Sixty-one patients with cirrhosis and HVPG below 10 mmHg were included in the study. Data were collected from medical files and National Patient Registries. Variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy and death related to cirrhosis were registered. Thirty-nine patients were graded as Child class A, 19 as class B and 3 as class C. Median survival time was 11 years.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (46%) developed one or more complications: variceal bleeding in 10 (16%) and hepatic encephalopathy in 18 patients (30%). Twenty-three patients (38%) died from complications of cirrhosis. Two patients (3%) died from variceal bleeding, another two (3%) from gastrointestinal bleeding of unidentified source. Survival rate was significantly decreased compared with that in the background population.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of complications in patients with mild portal hypertension is considerable, and guidelines for follow-up or medical prophylaxis are warranted. The risk of bleeding from oesophageal varices is low and bleeding-related deaths rare.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient in cirrhosis: correlation with the size of varices, bleeding, ascites, and child's status

The hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) clearly reflects portal pressure in cirrhotic portal hypertension. Its relation with variceal bleeding has been well studied. We undertook to study the relation of HVPG to variceal size, Child's status, and etiology of cirrhosis. Patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension with esophageal varices underwent HVPG measurement as part of a prospective evaluation. One hundred seventy-six cirrhotics with varices (M:F, 140:36; mean age, 42.6 +/- 13.4 years), 104 with CLD related to viral etiology, 40 with alcoholic liver disease, 26 cryptogenic with cirrhosis, and 6 with miscellaneous causes of CLD underwent HVPG measurement. The mean HVPG was lower in patients with small varices (n = 77; 14.6 +/- 5.9 mm Hg) than in patients with large varices (n = 99; 19.2 +/- 6.6 mm Hg; P < 0.01). In patients with large varices, the mean HVPG in bleeders (n = 37) was higher than in nonbleeders (n = 62) (21.7 +/- 7.2 vs 17.9 +/- 6.2 mm Hg; P < 0.01). The mean HVPG was significantly higher in Child's B (n = 97; 17.4 +/- 6.9 mm Hg) and C (n = 56; 19.0 +/- 5.7 mm Hg) compared to Child's A cirrhotics (n = 23; 12.2 +/- 5.9 mm Hg; P < 0.01), and Child's C compared to Child's B cirrhotics (P = 0.05). HVPG was higher in alcoholic compared to nonalcoholic cirrhotics (20.8 +/- 7.3 vs 16.4 +/- 6.3 mm Hg; P < 0.05), but this was not significant in multivariate analysis. The HVPG was comparable between hepatitis B- and hepatitis C virus-related cirrhotics (P = 0.8). Cirrhotics with ascites had a higher HVPG than those without ascites (18.5 +/- 5.6 vs 16.6 +/- 7.6 mm Hg; P = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, only Child's status, size of varices, and variceal bleed predicted higher HVPG. HVPG is higher in cirrhotics with large varices and a history of bleed. There is a good correlation between HVPG and large varices, bleeder status, and ascites. A higher HVPG reflects more severe liver disease. The etiology of liver disease did not influence the portal pressure.

Hepatic vein pressure gradient reduction and prevention of variceal bleeding in cirrhosis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

A reduction of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) to </=12 mm Hg or by >/=20% of baseline prevents variceal bleeding in cirrhosis. Because some inconsistent data have argued against the clinical application of these hemodynamic targets, we performed a systematic review of available studies from the Cochrane Library and MEDLINE.

METHODS

Hemodynamic targets were HVPG reduction (1) to </=12 mm Hg; (2) by >/=20% with final value >12 mm Hg; (3) by >/=20% or to </=12 mm Hg. Meta-regression analysis was used to explore heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were identified including 943 patients. Pooled odds ratios for bleeding for the 3 hemodynamic targets were, respectively, 0.21 (95% CI: 0.10-0.45; P = .0001), 0.25 (95% CI: 0.11-0.56; P = .001), and 0.17 (95% CI: 0.09-0.33; P = .001). A significant heterogeneity was found for the 2 last estimates, and meta-regression analysis showed that this was caused by an exceedingly long interval between HVPG measurements in 1 study. After exclusion of that study, heterogeneity disappeared, and the pooled odds ratios were, respectively, 0.19 (95% CI: 0.11-0.34; P = .0001) and 0.14 (95% CI: 0.09-0.21; P = .0001). The beneficial effect of HVPG reduction for first bleeding was similar to that for recurrent bleeding. Mortality was significantly reduced for HVPG reduction by >/=20% or to </=12 mm Hg (pooled odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI: 0.19-0.81, P = .012).

CONCLUSIONS

HVPG reduction to </=12 mm Hg or by >/=20% significantly reduces the risk of bleeding, and a reduction of >/=20% significantly reduces mortality. These hemodynamic targets should be considered for clinical practice and for randomized controlled trials.

Hemodynamic response-guided therapy for prevention of variceal rebleeding: an uncontrolled pilot study

The clinical usefulness of assessing hemodynamic response to drug therapy in the prophylaxis of variceal rebleeding is unknown. An open-labeled, uncontrolled pilot trial was performed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of using the hemodynamic response to pharmacological treatment to guide therapy in this setting. Fifty patients with acute variceal bleeding underwent a hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement 5 days after the episode. Nadolol and nitrates were initiated, and a second HVPG was measured 15 days later. Responder patients (> or =20% decrease in HVPG from baseline) were maintained on drugs, partial responders (> or =10% and <20%) had banding ligation added to the drugs, and nonresponders (<10%) received a transjugular intrahepatic portal-systemic shunt (TIPS). Mean follow-up was 22 months. Eight patients (16%) did not receive the second HVPG, 6 of them because of early variceal rebleeding. Of the other 42 patients, 24 were classified as responders (57%); 10 as partial responders (24%), who had banding added; and 8 as nonresponders (19%), who received a TIPS. Patients with cirrhosis of viral etiology compared to alcoholic cirrhosis tended to present more early rebleedings, less response to drugs and needed more TIPS. Variceal rebleeding occurred in 22% of all patients but only in 12% of patients whose hemodynamic response was assessed. The 3 therapeutic groups were not different. In conclusion, using hemodynamic response to pharmacological treatment to guide therapy in secondary prophylaxis to prevent variceal bleeding is feasible and effectively protects patients from rebleeding. In this context, viral cirrhosis seems to present a worse outcome than alcoholic cirrhosis.

Perendoscopic variceal pressure measurement

OBJECTIVES

In patients with cirrhosis, the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is the reference method for the assessment of portal hypertension (PHT). Variceal pressure (VP) may be measured at endoscopy, but its relationship to the HVPG remains controversial. The aim of the study was to retrospectively compare HVPG and VP values obtained in a cohort of patients with cirrhosis and PHT.

METHODS

Within 8 days (range: 6-10 days), 64 patients in a stable condition with biopsy-proven cirrhosis [alcoholic: 47; other 17; mean age: 56.5 yrs (35-70); mean Child-Pugh's score: 9.4 +/- 1.9; ascites: 37/64; previous variceal bleeding (="bleeders"): 24/64) and oesophageal varices (grade 2: 49; grade 3: 15)] underwent both measurement of the HVPG during transjugular liver biopsy and VP at endoscopy using a "home made" pressure sensitive gauge in the absence of needle puncture of the varix. Alcoholic hepatitis was present in 28 patients with alcoholic cirrhosis.

RESULTS

The pressure sensitive gauge was well tolerated. The mean HVPG and VP values were 18.5 +/- 3.4 mmHg and 19 +/- 3.7 mmHg, respectively. A significant difference was observed between "bleeders" (n=24) and non "bleeders" (n=40) in terms of VP values (21.4 +/- 3.3 vs 17.2 +/- 3.2 mmHg, P<0.001), but not for HVPG values (19.4 +/- 4.1 vs 17.9 +/- 2.8 mmHg, P=0.075). A positive correlation was observed between VP and HVPG values (r=0.62, P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this group of patients with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices, a "home-made" pressure sensitive gauge allowed a non invasive perendoscopic measurement of VP. The positive correlation between VP and HVPG values suggests that measurement of VP may be a reliable estimate of portal pressure in these patients.