Predictors of nonresponse to lactulose in patients with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy

Metabolic disorder and functional disturbance in the central executive network in minimal hepatic encephalopathy

The aim of this paper is to investigate dynamical functional disturbance in central executive network in minimal hepatic encephalopathy and determine its association with metabolic disorder and cognitive impairment. Data of magnetic resonance spectroscopy and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging were obtained from 27 cirrhotic patients without minimal hepatic encephalopathy, 20 minimal hepatic encephalopathy patients, and 24 healthy controls. Central executive network was identified utilizing seed-based correlation approach. Dynamic functional connectivity across central executive network was calculated using sliding-window approach. Functional states were estimated by K-means clustering. Right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex metabolite ratios (i.e. glutamate and glutamine complex/total creatine, myo-inositol / total creatine, and choline / total creatine) were determined. Neurocognitive performance was determined by psychometric hepatic encephalopathy scores. Minimal hepatic encephalopathy patients had decreased myo-inositol / total creatine and choline / total creatine and increased glutamate and glutamine complex / total creatine in right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (all P ≤ 0.020); decreased static functional connectivity between bilateral dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and between right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and lateral-inferior temporal cortex (P ≤ 0.001); increased frequency and mean dwell time in state-1 (P ≤ 0.001), which exhibited weakest functional connectivity. Central executive network dynamic functional indices were significantly correlated with right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex metabolic indices and psychometric hepatic encephalopathy scores. Right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex myo-inositol / total creatine and mean dwell time in state-1 yielded best potential for diagnosing minimal hepatic encephalopathy. Dynamic functional disturbance in central executive network may contribute to neurocognitive impairment and could be correlated with metabolic disorder.

Cognition-tracking-based strategies for diagnosis and treatment of minimal hepatic encephalopathy

Minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE), which shows mild cognitive impairment, is a subtle complication of cirrhosis that has been shown to affect daily functioning and quality of life. However, until 2014, relevant guidelines do not give much attention to the diagnosis and treatment of MHE, resulting in patients being ignored and denied the benefits of treatment. In this review, we summarize recent cognition-based research about (1) alteration of nerve cells, including astrocytes, microglial cells and neurons, in mild cognitive impairment in MHE; (2) comparison of methods in detecting cognitive impairment in MHE; and (3) comparison of methods for therapy of cognitive impairment in MHE. We hope to provide information about diagnosis and treatment of cognitive impairment in patients with MHE.

Pharmacotherapies that specifically target ammonia for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in adults with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy is a common complication of cirrhosis, with high related morbidity and mortality. Its presence is associated with a wide spectrum of change ranging from clinically obvious neuropsychiatric features, known as 'overt' hepatic encephalopathy, to abnormalities manifest only on psychometric or electrophysiological testing, 'minimal' hepatic encephalopathy. The exact pathogenesis of the syndrome is unknown but ammonia plays a key role. Drugs that specifically target ammonia include sodium benzoate, glycerol phenylbutyrate, ornithine phenylacetate, AST-120 (spherical carbon adsorbent), and polyethylene glycol.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of pharmacotherapies that specifically target ammonia versus placebo, no intervention, or other active interventions, for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and three other databases to March 2019. We also searched online trials registries such as ClinicalTrials.gov, European Medicines Agency, WHO International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, and the Food and Drug Administration for ongoing or unpublished trials. In addition, we searched conference proceedings, checked bibliographies, and corresponded with investigators.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials comparing sodium benzoate, glycerol phenylbutyrate, ornithine phenylacetate, AST-120, and polyethylene glycol versus placebo or non-absorbable disaccharides, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status. We included participants with minimal or overt hepatic encephalopathy or participants who were at risk of developing hepatic encephalopathy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included reports. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analyses and presented results using risk ratios (RR) or mean differences (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and I² statistic values as a marker of heterogeneity. We assessed bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary domains and the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 11 randomised clinical trials that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Two trials evaluated the prevention of hepatic encephalopathy while nine evaluated the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The trials assessed sodium benzoate (three trials), glycerol phenylbutyrate (one trial), ornithine phenylacetate (two trials), AST-120 (two trials), and polyethylene glycol (three trials). Overall, 499 participants received these pharmacotherapies while 444 participants received a placebo preparation or a non-absorbable disaccharide. We classified eight of the 11 trials as at 'high risk of bias' and downgraded the certainty of the evidence to very low for all outcomes.Eleven trials, involving 943 participants, reported mortality data, although there were no events in five trials. Our analyses found no beneficial or harmful effects of sodium benzoate versus non-absorbable disaccharides (RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.49 to 3.28; 101 participants; 2 trials; I² = 0%), glycerol phenylbutyrate versus placebo (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.81; 178 participants; 1 trial), ornithine phenylacetate versus placebo (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.51; 269 participants; 2 trials; I² = 0%), AST-120 versus lactulose (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.85; 41 participants; 1 trial), or polyethylene glycol versus lactulose (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.64; 190 participants; 3 trials; I² = 0%).Seven trials involving 521 participants reported data on hepatic encephalopathy. Our analyses showed a beneficial effect of glycerol phenylbutyrate versus placebo (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.90; 178 participants; 1 trial; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 6), and of polyethylene glycol versus lactulose (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.44; 190 participants; 3 trials; NNTB 4). We did not observe beneficial effects in the remaining three trials with extractable data: sodium benzoate versus non-absorbable disaccharides (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.93; 74 participants; 1 trial); ornithine phenylacetate versus placebo (RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.12 to 62.70; 38 participants; 1 trial); or AST-120 versus lactulose (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.85; 41 participants; 1 trial).Ten trials, involving 790 participants, reported a total of 130 serious adverse events. Our analyses found no evidence of beneficial or harmful effects of sodium benzoate versus non-absorbable disaccharides (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.68; 101 participants; 2 trials), glycerol phenylbutyrate versus placebo (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.85 to 3.13; 178 participants; 1 trial), ornithine phenylacetate versus placebo (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.36; 264 participants; 2 trials; I² = 0%), or polyethylene glycol versus lactulose (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.82; 190 participants; 3 trials; I² = 0%). Likewise, eight trials, involving 782 participants, reported a total of 374 non-serious adverse events and again our analyses found no beneficial or harmful effects of the pharmacotherapies under review when compared to placebo or to lactulose/lactitol.Nine trials, involving 733 participants, reported data on blood ammonia. We observed significant reductions in blood ammonia in placebo-controlled trials evaluating sodium benzoate (MD -32.00, 95% CI -46.85 to -17.15; 16 participants; 1 trial), glycerol phenylbutyrate (MD -12.00, 95% CI -23.37 to -0.63; 178 participants; 1 trial), ornithine phenylacetate (MD -27.10, 95% CI -48.55 to -5.65; 231 participants; 1 trial), and AST-120 (MD -22.00, 95% CI -26.75 to -17.25; 98 participants; 1 trial). However, there were no significant differences in blood ammonia concentrations in comparison with lactulose/lactitol with sodium benzoate (MD 9.00, 95% CI -1.10 to 19.11; 85 participants; 2 trials; I² = 0%), AST-120 (MD 5.20, 95% CI -2.75 to 13.15; 35 participants; 1 trial), and polyethylene glycol (MD -29.28, 95% CI -95.96 to 37.39; 90 participants; 2 trials; I² = 88%).

FUNDING

Five trials received support from pharmaceutical companies while four did not; two did not provide this information.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to determine the effects of these pharmacotherapies on the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in adults with cirrhosis. They have the potential to reduce blood ammonia concentrations when compared to placebo, but their overall effects on clinical outcomes of interest and the potential harms associated with their use remain uncertain. Further evidence is needed to evaluate the potential beneficial and harmful effects of these pharmacotherapies in this clinical setting.

Hepatic encephalopathy: Lessons from preclinical studies

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a major complication that is closely related to the progression of end-stage liver disease. Metabolic changes in advanced liver failure can promote cognition impairment, attention deficits and motor dysfunction that may result in coma and death. HE can be subdivided according to the type of hepatic injury, namely, type A, which results from acute liver failure, type B, which is associated with a portosystemic shunting without intrinsic liver disease, and type C, which is due to chronic liver disease. Several studies have investigated the pathogenesis of the disease, and most of the mechanisms have been explored using animal models. This article aimed to review the use of preclinical models to investigate HE. The most used animal species are rats and mice. Experimental models of type A HE include surgical procedures and the administration of hepatotoxic medications, whereas models of types B and C HE are generally surgically induced lesions in liver tissue, which evolve to hepatic cirrhosis. Preclinical models have allowed the comprehension of the pathways related to HE.

Combination of rifaximin and lactulose improves clinical efficacy and mortality in patients with hepatic encephalopathy

Background

Rifaximin and lactulose are common effective agents for hepatic encephalopathy (HE). Whether a combination of rifaximin and lactulose improves the efficacy and mortality in patients with HE compared with lactulose alone needs to be analyzed.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in electronic databases and other sources for possible studies focusing on combination therapy of rifaximin and lactulose for HE between January 2000 and February 2018. A meta-analysis was performed by the method recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration, and estimated effect size was presented as risk difference (RD), 95% CI, and the number needed to treat (NNT). Subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and Trial Sequence Analysis were comprehensively performed to indicate the source of heterogeneity and risk of bias.

Results

Five randomized and five observational studies involving 2,276 patients were included. Combination therapy had a significant advantage in both clinical efficacy increase (RD 0.26, 95% CI 0.19–0.32, NNT 5) and mortality decrease (RD −0.16, 95% CI −0.20–0.11, NNT 9) in overall analysis. In the pooled analysis of randomized studies, combination therapy showed similar results in clinical efficacy (RD 0.25, 95% CI 0.16–0.35, NNT 4) and mortality (RD −0.22, 95% CI −0.33–0.12, NNT 5). Compared with lactulose, hospital stay was also reduced in combination therapy, and there was no significant difference in treatment-related adverse events between the two groups.

Conclusion

Combination of rifaximin and lactulose has beneficial effects on HE. Compared with lactulose alone, additional rifaximin increases clinical efficacy and decreases mortality. However, its effects on different types of HE are still uncertain.

L-ornithine L-aspartate for prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy is a common complication of cirrhosis and has high associated morbidity and mortality. The condition is classified as overt if it is clinically apparent or minimal if only evident though psychometric testing. The exact pathogenesis of this syndrome is unknown although ammonia is thought to play a key role. L-ornithine L-aspartate has ammonia-lowering properties and may, therefore, benefit people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of L-ornithine L-aspartate versus placebo, no intervention, or other active interventions in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We undertook electronic searches of The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and Science Citation Index Expanded to December 2017 and manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and corresponded with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding. We included participants with cirrhosis who had minimal or overt hepatic encephalopathy or who were at risk for developing hepatic encephalopathy. We compared: L-ornithine L-aspartate versus placebo or no intervention; and L-ornithine L-aspartate versus other active agents such as non-absorbable disaccharides, antibiotics, probiotics, or branched-chain amino acids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We undertook meta-analyses and presented the results as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains; we evaluated the risk of publication bias and other small trial effects in regression analyses; conducted subgroup and sensitivity analyses; and performed Trial Sequential Analyses. We determined the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 36 randomised clinical trials, involving at least 2377 registered participants, which fulfilled our inclusion criteria including 10 unpublished randomised clinical trials. However, we were only able to access outcome data from 29 trials involving 1891 participants. Five of the included trials assessed prevention, while 31 trials assessed treatment. Five trials were at low risk of bias in the overall assessment of mortality; one trial was at low risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes.L-ornithine L-aspartate had a beneficial effect on mortality compared with placebo or no intervention when including all trials (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.72; I² = 0%; 19 trials; 1489 participants; very low quality evidence), but not when the analysis was restricted to the trials at low risk of bias (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.58; 4 trials; 244 participants). It had a beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy compared with placebo or no intervention when including all trials (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.83; 22 trials; 1375 participants; I² = 62%; very low quality evidence), but not in the one trial at low risk of bias (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.07; 63 participants). The analysis of serious adverse events showed a potential benefit of L-ornithine L-aspartate when including all randomised clinical trials (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.90; 1 trial; 1489 participants; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence), but not in the one trial at low risk of bias for this outcome (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.15 to 4.65; 63 participants). The Trial Sequential Analyses of mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events found insufficient evidence to support or refute beneficial effects. Subgroup analyses showed no difference in outcomes in the trials evaluating evaluating the prevention or treatment of either overt or minimal hepatic encephalopathy or trials evaluating oral versus intravenous administration We were unable to undertake a meta-analysis of the three trials involving 288 participants evaluating health-related quality of life. Overall, we found no difference between L-ornithine L-aspartate and placebo or no intervention in non-serious adverse events (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.77; 14 trials; 1076 participants; I² = 40%). In comparison with lactulose, L-ornithine L-aspartate had no effect on mortality (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.17; 4 trials; 175 participants; I² = 0%); hepatic encephalopathy (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.57); serious adverse events (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11); or non-serious adverse events (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.18). In comparison with probiotics, L-ornithine L-aspartate had no effect on mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.11 to 9.51); serious adverse events (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.23 to 4.88); or changes in blood ammonia concentrations from baseline (RR -2.30 95% CI -6.08 to 1.48), but it had a possible beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.90). Finally, in comparison with rifaximin, L-ornithine L-aspartate had no effect on mortality (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.03; 2 trials; 105 participants); hepatic encephalopathy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.96); serious adverse events (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.42), or non-serious adverse events (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.42).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review suggest a possible beneficial effect of L-ornithine L-aspartate on mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events in comparisons with placebo or no-intervention, but, because the quality of the evidence is very low, we are very uncertain about these findings. There was very low quality evidence of a possible beneficial effect of L-ornithine L-aspartate on hepatic encephalopathy, when compared with probiotics, but no other benefits were demonstrated in comparison with other active agents. Additional access to data from completed, but unpublished trials, and new randomised placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials are needed.

Rifaximin treatment is associated with reduced risk of cirrhotic complications and prolonged overall survival in patients experiencing hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Rifaximin might decrease the risk of portal hypertension-related complications by controlling small intestinal bacterial overgrowth.

AIM

To evaluate whether rifaximin was associated with the risk of death and cirrhotic complications.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that included 1042 patients experiencing hepatic encephalopathy (HE): 421 patients without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC; the non-HCC cohort) and 621 patients with HCC (the HCC cohort). The primary endpoint was overall survival and secondary endpoints were recurrence of HE and the development of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

In the non-HCC cohort, 145 patients received rifaximin plus lactulose (the rifaximin group) and 276 patients received lactulose alone (the control group). The multivariate analysis revealed that rifaximin was significantly associated with lower risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.697; P = .024) and reduced the risk of recurrent HE (aHR, 0.452; P < .001), SBP (aHR, 0.210; P < .001) and variceal bleeding (aHR, 0.425; P = .011) but not HRS (aHR, 0.598; P = .08). In the HCC cohort, 173 patients received rifaximin plus lactulose and 448 patients received lactulose. Rifaximin was not associated with the risk of death (aHR, 1.177; P = .121). Rifaximin was associated with lower risk of SBP (aHR, 0.323; P < .001) but not with variceal bleeding (aHR, 0.660; P = .104) or recurrent HE (aHR, 0.689; P = .057). The risk of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea was not different between the groups (aHR, 0.028; P = .338).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients without HCC, rifaximin treatment was significantly associated with prolonged overall survival and reduced risks of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, variceal bleeding and recurrent hepatic encephalopathy.

Evaluation and Management of Hepatic Encephalopathy: Current Status and Future Directions

Hepatic encephalopathy is a spectrum of neurocognitive manifestations often seen in patients with liver injury or rarely in patients with portosystemic shunting without liver injury. It can be divided into minimal (covert) hepatic encephalopathy and overt hepatic encephalopathy, depending on the severity. Patients with hepatic encephalopathy have compromised clinical outcomes, decreased quality of life, and increased healthcare utilization, often resulting in a heavy financial and personal burden on caregivers. The diagnosis remains largely clinical, with the exclusion of possible other causes for the altered mental status. Current treatment strategies include nonabsorbable disaccharides and antibiotics. This review will focus on the diagnosis, management and clinical impact of hepatic encephalopathy.

CLIF-SOFA score and SIRS are independent prognostic factors in patients with hepatic encephalopathy due to alcoholic liver cirrhosis

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a complication associated with worst prognosis in decompensated liver cirrhosis (LC) patients. Previous studies have identified prognostic factors for HE, and recent studies reported an association between systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and liver disease. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors for 30-day mortality in alcoholic LC patients with HE who visited the emergency department (ED).This was a retrospective study of alcoholic LC patients with HE from January 1, 2010, to April 30, 2015. The baseline characteristics, complications of portal hypertension, laboratory values, Child-Pugh class, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment (CLIF-SOFA) score, and SIRS criteria were assessed. The presence of 2 or more SIRS criteria was considered SIRS. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and prognostic factors for patients with HE visiting the ED.In total, 105 patients who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed. Overall, the 30-day mortality rate was 6.7% (7 patients).Significant variables were hepatorenal syndrome, international normalized ratio, white blood cell count, total bilirubin level, MELD score CLIF-SOFA score, and SIRS in univariate analysis. CLIF-SOFA score and SIRS were the significant factors in the multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 5.56, 15.98; 95% confidence interval 1.18-26.18, 1.58-161.37; P = 0.03, P = 0.02). The mortality rates differed according to the CLIF-SOFA score (P < 0.01).The CLIF-SOFA score and SIRS in alcoholic LC patients with HE visiting the ED are independent predictors of 30-day mortality.

Non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and lactulose versus lactitol for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Non-absorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol) are recommended as first-line treatment for hepatic encephalopathy. The previous (second) version of this review included 10 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and eight RCTs evaluating lactulose versus lactitol for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. The review found no evidence to either support or refute the use of the non-absorbable disaccharides and no differences between lactulose versus lactitol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of i) non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and ii) lactulose versus lactitol in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to 19 October 2015; manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We presented the results of meta-analyses as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) and bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. Our analyses included regression analyses of publication bias and other small study effects, Trial Sequential Analyses to detect type 1 and type 2 errors, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with a total of 1828 participants. Eight RCTs had a low risk of bias in the assessment of mortality. All trials had a high risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention on mortality when including all RCTs with extractable data (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence) and in the eight RCTs with a low risk of bias (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; 705 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis with the relative risk reduction (RRR) reduced to 30% confirmed the findings when including all RCTs, but not when including only RCTs with a low risk of bias or when we reduced the RRR to 22%. Compared with placebo/no intervention, the non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with beneficial effects on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.69; 1415 participants; 22 RCTs; I(2) = 32%; moderate quality evidence). Additional analyses showed that non-absorbable disaccharides can help to reduce serious adverse events associated with the underlying liver disease including liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.60; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We confirmed the results in Trial Sequential Analysis. Tests for subgroup differences showed no statistical differences between RCTs evaluating prevention, overt, or minimal hepatic encephalopathy. The evaluation of secondary outcomes showed a potential beneficial effect of the non-absorbable disaccharides on quality of life, but we were not able to include the data in an overall meta-analysis (very low quality evidence). Non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with non-serious (mainly gastrointestinal) adverse events (very low quality evidence). None of the RCTs comparing lactulose versus lactitol evaluated quality of life. The review found no differences between lactulose and lactitol for the remaining outcomes (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review includes a large number of RCTs evaluating the prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The analyses found evidence that non-absorbable disaccharides may be associated with a beneficial effect on clinically relevant outcomes compared with placebo/no intervention.

Non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and lactulose versus lactitol for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Non-absorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol) are recommended as first-line treatment for hepatic encephalopathy. The previous (second) version of this review included 10 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and eight RCTs evaluating lactulose versus lactitol for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. The review found no evidence to either support or refute the use of the non-absorbable disaccharides and no differences between lactulose versus lactitol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of i) non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and ii) lactulose versus lactitol in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to 19 October 2015; manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We presented the results of meta-analyses as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) and bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. Our analyses included regression analyses of publication bias and other small study effects, Trial Sequential Analyses to detect type 1 and type 2 errors, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with a total of 1828 participants. Eight RCTs had a low risk of bias in the assessment of mortality. All trials had a high risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention on mortality when including all RCTs with extractable data (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence) and in the eight RCTs with a low risk of bias (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; 705 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis with the relative risk reduction (RRR) reduced to 30% confirmed the findings when including all RCTs, but not when including only RCTs with a low risk of bias or when we reduced the RRR to 22%. Compared with placebo/no intervention, the non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with beneficial effects on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.69; 1415 participants; 22 RCTs; I(2) = 32%; moderate quality evidence). Additional analyses showed that non-absorbable disaccharides can help to reduce serious adverse events associated with the underlying liver disease including liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.60; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We confirmed the results in Trial Sequential Analysis. Tests for subgroup differences showed no statistical differences between RCTs evaluating prevention, overt, or minimal hepatic encephalopathy. The evaluation of secondary outcomes showed a potential beneficial effect of the non-absorbable disaccharides on quality of life, but we were not able to include the data in an overall meta-analysis (very low quality evidence). Non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with non-serious (mainly gastrointestinal) adverse events (very low quality evidence). None of the RCTs comparing lactulose versus lactitol evaluated quality of life. The review found no differences between lactulose and lactitol for the remaining outcomes (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review includes a large number of RCTs evaluating the prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The analyses found evidence that non-absorbable disaccharides may be associated with a beneficial effect on clinically relevant outcomes compared with placebo/no intervention.

Inflammation: A novel target of current therapies for hepatic encephalopathy in liver cirrhosis

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a severe neuropsychiatric syndrome that most commonly occurs in decompensated liver cirrhosis and incorporates a spectrum of manifestations that ranges from mild cognitive impairment to coma. Although the etiology of HE is not completely understood, it is believed that multiple underlying mechanisms are involved in the pathogenesis of HE, and one of the main factors is thought to be ammonia; however, the ammonia hypothesis in the pathogenesis of HE is incomplete. Recently, it has been increasingly demonstrated that inflammation, including systemic inflammation, neuroinflammation and endotoxemia, acts in concert with ammonia in the pathogenesis of HE in cirrhotic patients. Meanwhile, a good number of studies have found that current therapies for HE, such as lactulose, rifaximin, probiotics and the molecular adsorbent recirculating system, could inhibit different types of inflammation, thereby improving the neuropsychiatric manifestations and preventing the progression of HE in cirrhotic patients. The anti-inflammatory effects of these current therapies provide a novel therapeutic approach for cirrhotic patients with HE. The purpose of this review is to describe the inflammatory mechanisms behind the etiology of HE in cirrhosis and discuss the current therapies that target the inflammatory pathogenesis of HE.

Treatment of Overt Hepatic Encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is defined by an altered mental status in the setting of portosystemic shunting, with or without cirrhosis. The basis of HE is probably multi-factorial, but increased ammonia delivery to the brain is thought to play a pivotal role. Medical therapies have typically focused on reducing blood ammonia concentrations. These measures are moderately effective, but further improvements will require identification of new therapeutic targets. Two medications, lactulose and rifaximin, are currently approved for the treatment of HE in the USA - new compounds are available off-label, and are in clinical trials. The presence of HE is associated with a higher risk of death in cirrhotic patients. Liver transplantation typically cures HE, but HE does not increase the MELD score, and therefore does not contribute to the likelihood of liver transplantation.

Management of overt hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is an important complication of cirrhosis with significant morbidity and mortality. Management of HE primarily involves avoidance of precipitating factors and administration of various ammonia-lowering therapies such as non-absorbable disaccharides, antimicrobial agents like rifaximin and l-ornithine l-aspartate. The non-absorbable disaccharides which include lactulose and lactitol are considered the first-line therapy for the treatment of HE and in primary and secondary prophylaxis of HE. Lactitol is comparable to lactulose in the treatment of HE with fewer side effects. Rifaximin is effective in treatment of HE and recent systemic reviews found it comparable to disaccharides and is effective in secondary prophylaxis of HE. Many agents like l-ornithine l-aspartate, probiotics, zinc, sodium benzoate have been tried either alone or in combination with lactulose for the treatment of HE. Combination therapy of disaccharides either with rifaximin, l-ornithine l-aspartate, probiotics for the treatment of HE needs further validation in large studies.

Treatment of Acute Hepatic Encephalopathy: Comparing the Effects of Adding Rifaximin to Lactulose on Patient Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Rifaximin is approved for the reduction of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) recurrence in patients with chronic liver disease (CLD); however, few studies have evaluated the benefit of adding rifaximin to lactulose for treatment of acute HE. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of combination therapy with lactulose and rifaximin on hospital length of stay (LOS) and readmission rates.

METHODS

A retrospective study of patients admitted to an adult hospital within the Methodist LeBonheur Healthcare (MLH) System in Memphis, Tennessee, between 2007 and 2012 was conducted. Patients were identified via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) coding for liver cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Of the 173 patients included, 87 (50%) received lactulose monotherapy and 62 (36%) combination therapy, while 24 (14%) underwent therapy escalation. Median LOS was 6 days in monotherapy group and 8 days in combination group (P = .9). At 180 days, patients receiving combination therapy had fewer readmissions for HE than those receiving monotherapy (2.4% vs 16.2%, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Addition of rifaximin to lactulose for treatment of acute HE did not reduce hospital LOS; however, it did result in lower readmission rates for HE at 180 days.

MELD score and antibiotics use are predictors of length of stay in patients hospitalized with hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) represents a significant burden to the healthcare system. The aim of this study was to determine factors influencing the hospital length of stay among patients hospitalized with HE.

METHODS

A data warehouse query was performed to identify 316 patients with a first hospitalization during which HE occurred, between April 2010 and February 2012. Baseline and hospitalization characteristics were collected with IRB approval. A negative binomial multivariable model was used to control for potential confounders on the length of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Median age was 59 years, and 60.4% of admitted patients were male. The median MELD score was 22 (IQR: 17-28). Median length of stay was 8 days (IQR: 3.25-14.25). After controlling for MELD score, female gender (2.2 days; p = 0.04), being initially admitted for a reason other than HE (liver-related: 7.6 days; p < 0.01 and non liver-related 10.7 days; p < 0.01) and receiving antibiotics other than rifaximin (10.5 days; p < 0.01) were associated with longer length of stay whereas hepatitis C (-3.1 days; p < 0.01) was associated with a shorter length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

MELD score, gender, use of antibiotics other than rifaximin, reason for admission and hepatitis C are predictors readily available in clinic that can help identify patients at risk for longer length of stay.

Update on management of patients with overt hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a multifactorial neuropsychiatric disease that affects patients with cirrhosis. We review the clinical impact, pathogenesis, evaluation, management, and prevention of overt HE in patients with cirrhosis. Articles published between January 1960 and November 2012 were acquired through a MEDLINE search of different combinations of the terms hepatic encephalopathy, pathophysiology, treatment, prophylaxis, prevention, prognosis, and recurrence. The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database was used to obtain prevalence and cost information related to hospitalizations of patients with HE. The literature describes significant morbidity and mortality of HE in patients with cirrhosis. Overt HE develops in 30% to 45% of patients with cirrhosis and is associated with a substantial pharmacoeconomic burden, particularly HE-related hospitalizations. The development of HE in patients with cirrhosis portends a worsened prognosis and is incorporated into the Child-Pugh classification of the severity of liver disease. In the hospitalized patient, the development of HE is associated with precipitating events (eg, gastrointestinal bleeding, dehydration, infection), and in some patients, its course is characterized by frequent and severe relapses. In addition, hospitalized patients with overt HE have a 3.9-fold increased mortality risk. Patient management employs nonabsorbable disaccharides, the nonsystemic antibiotic rifaximin, or both, to treat acute HE episodes and prevent HE relapse. In open-label trials, use of the nonabsorbable disaccharide lactulose reduced the risk of overt HE recurrence in patients compared with no-lactulose control groups for ≤ a median of 14 months. In a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, rifaximin 550 mg twice daily was more effective in maintaining HE remission compared with placebo and was associated with a reduction in HE-related hospitalizations. Recent advances in treatment and preventative therapies may reduce the personal, societal, and economic impact of this disorder.

Disaccharides in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy

Management of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) primarily involves avoidance of precipitating factors and administration of various ammonia-lowering therapies such as nonabsorbable disaccharides and antimicrobial agents like rifaximin. The nonabsorbable disaccharides which include lactulose and lactitol are considered the first-line therapy for the treatment of HE and minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE). Lactulose significantly improves cognitive function and health-related quality of life in patients with MHE. Lactitol is comparable to lactulose in the treatment of HE with fewer side effects. Lactulose has also shown to be effective in primary and secondary prophylaxis of HE. Disaccharides were found to be comparable to rifaximin in recent systemic reviews in the treatment of HE however conclusion was based on inclusion of some poor quality trials. Combination therapy of disaccharides either with rifaximin, L-ornithine L-aspartate,probiotics for the treatment of HE needs further validation in large studies.

Complications and outcomes in chronic liver disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic liver disease (CLD) causes significant morbidity and mortality, mainly due to complications [hepatic encephalopathy, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH)]. Studies of the complications, management and outcomes in patients with CLD over the last 18 months are reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Predictors of response to lactulose therapy in hepatic encephalopathy have been reported, along with the effect of minimal hepatic encephalopathy on driving. Rifaximin was found to lead to better maintenance of remission and decreased readmission rates in patients with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. Satavaptan (a vasopressin receptor antagonist) was investigated for treatment of refractory ascites and appeared to be effective, but this compound is not currently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Patients with refractory ascites taking propranolol were found to have poorer outcomes than those not taking propranolol. Terlipressin currently appears to be the best medical therapy available for patients with type 1 HRS; the addition with albumin to terlipressin appeared to decrease mortality in patients with type 1 HRS. In primary prophylaxis of EVH, carvedilol was found to reduce the rate of initial bleeding compared with band ligation. Early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts placed in highly selected patients with acute EVH and a high risk of endoscopic failure decreased long-term mortality. In patients with gastric varices, primary prophylaxis with cyanoacrylate may decrease the probability of gastric variceal hemorrhage compared with nonselective beta-blockers.

SUMMARY

Refinement in clinical management strategies for patients with cirrhosis and its complications appear to continue to contribute to improved patient outcomes.