Betablockers do not increase efficacy of band ligation in primary prophylaxis but they improve survival in secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding

Impact of sarcopenia on variceal rebleeding in patients after endoscopic therapy: a multicenter retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia is a common complication of liver cirrhosis and can be used for predicting dismal prognostic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the role of sarcopenia in rebleeding and mortality of liver cirrhosis patients after endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

The liver cirrhosis patients who received endoscopic treatment were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to overcome selection bias. Two-year rebleeding episodes and mortality after endoscopic therapy were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 109 (32.4%) sarcopenia patients were reported. Before PSM, the frequency of rebleeding was significantly higher in the sarcopenia group relative to the non-sarcopenia group (41.3% vs. 15.9%, p < 0.001). Moreover, the multivariable analysis revealed that sarcopenia (p < 0.001, HR:2.596, 95% CI 1.591-4.237) was independently associated with a 2-year rebleeding episode. After PSM, the sarcopenia group exhibited an increased rebleeding rate as compared with non-sarcopenia group (44.4% vs. 15.3%, p < 0.001). According to multivariable analysis, sarcopenia (p < 0.001, HR:3.490, 95% CI 1.756-6.938) was identified as a significant predictor for 2-year rebleeding.

CONCLUSION

Sarcopenia was significantly associated with a high 2-year rebleeding rate in liver cirrhosis patients after endoscopic treatment. Therefore, the precise evaluation of a patient's nutritional status, including sarcopenia becomes mandatory before endoscopic treatment.

Statins, metformin, and RAS inhibitors did not reduce variceal bleeding risk and mortality in a large, real-life cohort of patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Previous experimental and clinical studies suggested a beneficial effect of statins, metformin, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers (RASi) on portal hypertension. Still, their effects on hard cirrhosis-related clinical endpoints, such as variceal bleeding and bleeding-related mortality, remain to be investigated.

METHODS

Thus, we recorded the use of statins, metformin and RASi in a large cohort of cirrhotic patients undergoing endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for primary (PP, n = 440) and secondary bleeding prophylaxis (SP, n = 480) between 01/2000 and 05/2020. Variceal (re-) bleeding and survival rates were compared between patients with vs. without these co-medications.

RESULTS

A total of 920 cirrhotic patients with varices were included. At first EBL, median MELD was 13 and 515 (56%) patients showed ascites. Statins, metformin and RASi were used by 49 (5.3%), 74 (8%), and 91 (9.9%) patients, respectively. MELD and platelet counts were similar in patients with and without the co-medications of interest. Rates of first variceal bleeding and variceal rebleeding at 2 years were 5.2% and 11.7%, respectively. Neither of the co-medications were associated with decreased first bleeding rates (log-rank tests in PP: statins p = 0.813, metformin p = 0.862, RASi p = 0.919) nor rebleeding rates (log-rank tests in SP: statin p = 0.113, metformin p = 0.348, RASi p = 0.273). Similar mortality rates were documented in patients with and without co-medications for PP (log-rank tests: statins p = 0.630, metformin p = 0.591, RASi p = 0.064) and for SP (statins p = 0.720, metformin p = 0.584, RASi p = 0.118).

CONCLUSION

In clinical practice, variceal bleeding and mortality rates of cirrhotic patients were not reduced by co-medication with statins, metformin or RASi. Nevertheless, we recommend the use of these co-medications by indication, as they may still exert beneficial effects on non-bleeding complications in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Contemporary concepts of prevention and management of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis patients

This editorial describes the contemporary concepts of prevention and management of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis (LC) patients according to the current guidelines. Gastroesophageal variceal bleeding is the most dangerous complication of portal hypertension in LC patients. Risk stratification and determination of an individual approach to the choice of therapeutic measures aimed at their prevention and management has emerged as one of the top concerns in modern hepatology. According to the current guidelines, in the absence of clinically significant portal hypertension, etiological and non-etiological therapies of LC is advisable for the primary preventing gastroesophageal variceal bleeding, whereas its presence serves as an indication for the administration of non-selective β-blockers, among which carvedilol is the drug of choice. Non-selective β-blockers, as well as endoscopic variceal ligation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt can be used to prevent recurrence of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding. Pharmacotherapy with vasoactive drugs (terlipressin, somatostatin, octreotide), endoscopic variceal ligation, endovascular techniques and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are recommended for the treatment of acute gastroesophageal variceal bleeding. Objective and accurate risk stratification of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding will allow developing individual strategies for their prevention and management, avoiding the first and further decompensation in LC, which will improve the prognosis and survival of patients suffering from it.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

DISCUSSION

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

Prevention in Hepatology

The prevention of liver disease has improved significantly in the last few decades, to the point that it can now be considered a true success story. The wide variety of interventions, including comprehensive vaccination strategies, novel medications, lifestyle changes, and even preventive surgeries, have reduced the morbidity and mortality of chronic liver diseases. However, the prevalence of chronic liver diseases is increasing worldwide. Currently, fatty liver disease alone is estimated to be present in as much as 30% of the adult population. Furthermore, there is a trend towards increasing incidences of chronic hepatitis B, and a global lack of success in efforts to eliminate chronic hepatitis C. Thus, improving and efficiently rolling out existing and successful prevention strategies for chronic liver diseases will play an essential role in healthcare throughout the upcoming decades. In this review, we summarize the current options and concepts for preventing chronic liver diseases, highlight their limitations, and provide an outlook on probable future developments to improve awareness, integrated care, and the analysis of big data.

The prognostic evaluation of ALBI score in endoscopic treatment of esophagogastric varices hemorrhage in liver cirrhosis

To analyze the independent risk factors for recurrent bleeding and death within 1 year after endoscopic treatment of esophagogastric varices hemorrhage (EGVB) in patients with liver cirrhosis, and to validate the predictive value of ALBI score for recurrent bleeding and death within 1 year after endoscopic treatment of EGVB in patients with liver cirrhosis. A total of 338 patients with EGVB who received endoscopic treatment for the first time in the Department of Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from January 1, 2016 to March 1, 2020 were selected. A database was established to analyze the patients' demographic data, surgical variables and postoperative outcomes. All patients were contacted and followed up to verify the predictive value of ALBI score for recurrent bleeding and mortality. 130 patients had rebleeding within 1 year after surgery (38.5%). 66 patients died within 1 year after surgery (19.5%). Patients with ALBI grade 3 had significantly higher rebleeding and mortality rates than those with grades 1 and 2. The AUC was used to compare the predictive value of the four scores for rebleeding and mortality within one year after endoscopic surgery. Both ALBI scores had the largest AUC. The ALBI score has certain predictive value for rebleeding and mortality within 1 year after endoscopic therapy in patients with cirrhotic EGVB.

Influence of subcutaneous adipose tissue index on prognosis in cirrhotic patients following endoscopic therapy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The relation of adipose tissue depletion with prognostic outcome of variceal bleeding among cirrhotic patients is still inconclusive. The present work explored whether adipose tissue, which was measured based on computed tomography (CT), was valuable for analyzing rebleeding and mortality among patients with variceal bleeding who had undergone endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

The study encompassed cirrhotic patients who underwent endoscopic therapy to prevent variceal rebleeding between January 2016 and October 2022. The L3-level CT images were obtained. Besides, impacts of subcutaneous adipose tissue index (SATI), visceral adipose tissue index (VATI), as well as total adipose tissue index (TATI) on rebleeding and mortality among cirrhotic patients following endoscopic therapy were examined.

RESULTS

In this work, our median follow-up period was 31 months. Among those adipose tissue indexes, only SATI exhibited an independent relation to higher rebleeding (HR 0.981, 95% CI, 0.971-0.991, p < 0.001) and mortality (HR 0.965, 95% CI, 0.944-0.986, p = 0.001) risks. Upon multivariate Cox regression, low SATI (male < 30.15 cm2/m2, female < 39.82 cm2/m2) was independently linked to higher rebleeding risk (HR 2.511, 95% CI, 1.604-3.932, p < 0.001) and increased mortality risk (HR 3.422, 95% CI, 1.489-7.864, p = 0.004) after adjusting for other predictors. Furthermore, subgroups were created based on using nonselective β-blockers (NSBBs), demonstrating that quantitatively assessing SATI exerts a vital role in evaluating rebleeding incidence in patients with or without NSBB therapy.

CONCLUSION

This study underscores the potential of quantifying SATI as a means for achieving a more accurate risk classification for individual patients and identifying patients that can gain more benefits from nutritional intervention.

Secondary Prevention of Esophageal Variceal Bleeding Is Often Imperfect: A National, Population-Based Cohort Study of 3592 Patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Secondary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding is important to improve prognosis, but uptake of guidelines is unknown in a real-world setting. Here, we determined the proportion of patients receiving appropriate nonselective beta-blocker treatment and repeat upper endoscopy after a first episode of esophageal variceal bleeding within a reasonable time frame.

METHODS

Population-based registers were used to identify all patients with a first episode of esophageal variceal bleeding in Sweden from 2006 to 2020. Crosslinkage between registers was performed to receive information on the cumulative incidence of patients with a dispensation of nonselective beta-blockers and repeat upper endoscopy within 120 days from baseline. Overall mortality was investigated using Cox regression.

RESULTS

In total, 3592 patients were identified, with a median age of 63 (interquartile range, 54-71) years. The cumulative incidence of a dispensation of nonselective beta-blockers and a repeat endoscopy within 120 days was 33%. A total of 77% received either of these treatments. Overall mortality was high, with 65% of patients dying after esophageal variceal bleeding during the full follow-up period (median 1.7 years). We observed an improved overall mortality during the later years of the study period (adjusted hazard ratio for the 2016-2020 period compared with the 2006-2010 period, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.89). Patients with receipt of nonselective beta-blockers and repeat upper endoscopy had better overall survival compared with those without (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.90).

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding has not been widely undertaken, with many patients not receiving guideline-supported interventions within a reasonable time frame. This highlights a need to raise awareness on appropriate prevention strategies to clinicians and patients.

Endoscopic band ligation is safe despite low platelet count and high INR

BACKGROUND

Prophylactic endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is used to prevent variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. The association of thrombocytopenia, high INR (international normalized ratio) and liver dysfunction with the risk of procedure-related bleeding (PRB) remains debated and recommendations are controversial.

METHODS

We analyzed real-life data of cirrhotic patients undergoing elective EBL at two large Viennese centers between Q1/2000-Q1/2018. PRB was defined as bleeding occurring within 30 days after EBL.

RESULTS

We included 617 patients undergoing a total of 1178 prophylactic EBL procedures (median 2 per patient). Sixteen (2.6%) of 617 patients experienced PRB after a median of 12.5 (IQR 17.3) days with no difference in characteristics and laboratory values between the two groups. The proportion of patients with platelets (PLT) < 50 G/L or INR ≥ 1.5 was similar in patients with vs. without PRB. A higher MELD showed a non-significant association with EBL-related bleeding risk (odds ratio, OR 1.07; 95% confidence interval 95% CI 1.00-1.16, p = 0.058). While serum bilirubin was a significant predictor for PRB (OR: 1.10; 95% CI 1.03-1.18), the presence of large varices (OR 0.85 vs. small varices; 95% CI 0.20-3.84), INR (OR 0.50; 95% CI 0.10-3.14), PLT (OR 1.00; 95% CI 1.00-1.01) and the use of non-selective betablockers (OR 1.20; CI 95% 0.38-3.76) were not associated with PRB.

CONCLUSION

EBL is safe and procedure-related bleedings are rare (2.6%) including in patients with thrombocytopenia < 50 G/L or high INR ≥ 1.5. Only high MELD, and especially high bilirubin seem to be linked to an increased risk of EBL-related bleeding.

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

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

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

BACKGROUND & AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The prognostic value of HVPG-response to non-selective beta-blockers in patients with NASH cirrhosis and varices

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis has become a leading cause of cirrhosis. The prognostic value of (HVPG)-guided NSBB prophylaxis remains to be investigated in the setting of NASH cirrhosis.

METHODS

Patients with NASH cirrhosis and varices undergoing HVPG-guided NSBB therapy were included. HVPG-response to NSBBs was evaluated within a median 52 (IQR:28-71) days after baseline measurement. HVPG-Response was defined as a decrease of ≥10% from baseline or below <12 mmHg. The composite endpoint was defined as variceal bleeding, decompensation, and liver-related death.

RESULTS

Thirtyeight patients were included: Child-A/B:33(87%), Child-C:5(13%) median HVPG:19.7 ± 4.7 mmHg. 21(55.3%) patients achieved HVPG-response to NSBB. Presence of diabetes(aOR:0.16, p = 0.038) and arterial blood pressure (aOR:1.07, p = 0.044) were independently associated with NSBB-response. While NSBB-HVPG-responders showed fewer decompensations within 90 days (n = 1(5%) vs. n = 3(29%), p = 0.172), only Child-Pugh stage B/C (p = 0.001), MELD ≥ 15(p = 0.021) and HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg(p = 0.011) predicted the composite endpoint at 90 days. Similarly, after 2years of follow-up, only Child-Pugh stage (B:p = 0.001, C:p < 0.001), MELD ≥ 15 (p = 0.021), HVPG≥20 mmHg (p = 0.011) predicted the composite endpoint. Importantly, all bleeding events occurred in HVPG-NSBB non-responders.

CONCLUSION

HVPG-response to NSBB was achieved in 55.3% of NASH patients with varices and this seemed to protect from variceal bleeding. However, only baseline HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg, Child-Pugh stage B/C and MELD ≥ 15 were predictors of decompensation/death in patients with NASH cirrhosis and varices.

Combined Pharmacological and Endoscopic Treatment for Worsening Gastroesophageal Varices in Patients with Cirrhosis

Background

At the present time, in patients with liver cirrhosis and gastroesophageal varices, primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding made with combination therapy with non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) and endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is not recommended. The aim of this study was to evaluate if patients with worsening varices while on NSBBs regimen benefit, in terms of bleeding and survival, from adding treatment with EBL.

Methods

Patients with cirrhosis and endoscopic finding of gastroesophageal varices with high risk feature (increased variceal size and/or development of red signs) during primary prophylaxis with NSBBs, followed at the Unit of Internal Medicine and Hepatology, University and General Hospital of Padova, Italy, from 2012 to 2019, were retrospectively evaluated. When an increased bleeding risk of the varices was confirmed, patients maintained the pharmacological therapy alone or underwent also EBL. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of variceal bleeding, the secondary endpoint was mortality at 30 months.

Results

Compared to patients treated only with NSBBs (n=56), in patients treated also with EBL (n=45), the 30‐month probability of variceal bleeding (29.1% vs 5.1%; P =0.036) was significantly reduced, while the probability of survival was similar (59.6% vs 65.7%; P=0.61). On multivariate analysis, treatment with EBL was found to be a weak protective factor for mortality (HR 0.47, P=0.044).

Conclusion

In patients with liver cirrhosis, when varices show endoscopic feature of increased haemorrhagic risk, adding EBL to NSBBs is effective in reducing the probability of first bleeding.

Progress in research of factors associated with esophageal and gastric variceal rebleeding in cirrhosis

Rebleeding of esophageal varices in cirrhosis is the focus of secondary prevention in patients with esophageal varices, which can significantly increase the risk of death and seriously affect the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis. At present, clinical focus is not only on the factors affecting the first bleeding and prognosis of esophageal and gastric varices in cirrhosis, but also on the analysis and summary of the factors related to rebleeding. This paper will summarize the impact of epidemiological and laboratory indexes, endoscopy and imaging, and common scoring systems on rebleeding in liver cirrhosis patients with esophageal varices, with an aim to help clinicians formulate individualized treatment plans and preventive strategies, reduce rebleeding rate and fatality rate, and improve patient prognosis.

Long-term outcomes of hemostatic therapy for variceal bleeding and the challenge pending in the post-direct-acting antivirals era

Background and study aims

This study evaluated the longterm outcomes of mainly endoscopic hemostatic therapy for gastrointestinal variceal bleeding and of the transition of hemostatic therapy.

Patients and methods

Among 1,163 patients treated for gastrointestinal varices between April 2006 and June 2020, a total of 125 patients who underwent emergency hemostatic therapy were enrolled. Survival rates and secondary evaluation points were analyzed. Additionally, patients were classified into two groups: the previous and latter term. Patients' background, therapeutic method, and treatment results were compared between the groups.

Results

94.4% had cirrhosis. The average Child-Pugh score was 8.90. Successful primary hemostasis rate was 98.4%, and 5.6% died within 2 weeks, all with a Child-Pugh score ≥9. The respective 1- and 5-year survival rates for Child-Pugh grade A/B were 81.3% and 55.4%, while those for Child-Pugh grade C were 58.1% and 17.8%. Child-Pugh grade C or hepatocellular carcinoma was significantly associated with poor prognosis. In total, 21.6% experienced variceal re-bleeding; 62.9% of these cases were triggered by continued alcohol consumption. There was no significant difference in survival between patients with and without variceal re-bleeding and in post-treatment survival between the previous and latter terms. In the latter term, the number of cases caused by continued alcohol consumption significantly increased.

Conclusions

Multidisciplinary treatment and continuation of proper management after hemostatic therapy for variceal bleeding are crucial. Continued alcohol consumption leads to variceal bleeding and re-bleeding; its proper management, including alcohol abstinence, is one of the major challenges left in the post-directacting antivirals era.

Amelioration of systemic inflammation in advanced chronic liver disease upon beta-blocker therapy translates into improved clinical outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Systemic inflammation promotes the development of clinical events in patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD). We assessed whether (1) non-selective beta blocker (NSBB) treatment initiation impacts biomarkers of systemic inflammation and (2) whether these changes in systemic inflammation predict complications and mortality.

DESIGN

Biomarkers of systemic inflammation, that is, white blood cell count (WBC), C reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and procalcitonin (PCT) were determined at sequential hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurements without NSBB and under stable NSBB intake. The influence of NSBB-related changes in systemic inflammation on the risk of decompensation and liver-related death was analysed using competing risk regression.

RESULTS

Our study comprised 307 stable patients with ACLD (Child-A: 77 (25.1%), Child-B: 161 (52.4%), Child-C: 69 (22.5%), median HVPG: 20 (IQR 17-24) mm Hg) including 231 (75.2%) with decompensated disease.WBC significantly decreased upon NSBB therapy initiation (median: -2 (IQR -19;+13)%, p=0.011) in the overall cohort. NSBB-related reductions of WBC (Child-C: -16 (-30;+3)% vs Child-B: -2 (-16;+16)% vs Child-A: +3 (-7;+13)%, p<0.001) and of CRP (Child-C: -26 (-56,+8)% vs Child-B: -16 (-46;+13)% vs Child-A: ±0 (-33;+33)%, p<0.001) were more pronounced in advanced stages of cirrhosis. The NSBB-associated changes in WBC correlated with changes in CRP (Spearman's ρ=0.228, p<0.001), PCT (ρ=0.470, p=0.002) and IL-6 (ρ=0.501, p=0.001), but not with changes in HVPG (ρ=0.097, p=0.088).An NSBB-related decrease in systemic inflammation (ie, WBC reduction ≥15%) was achieved by n=91 (29.6%) patients and was found to be an independent protective factor of further decompensation (subdistribution HR, sHR: 0.694 (0.49-0.98), p=0.038) in decompensated patients and of liver-related mortality in the overall patient cohort (sHR: 0.561 (0.356-0.883), p=0.013).

CONCLUSION

NSBB therapy seems to exert systemic anti-inflammatory activity as evidenced by reductions of WBC and CRP levels. Interestingly, this effect was most pronounced in Child-C and independent of HVPG response. An NSBB-related WBC reduction by ≥15% was associated with a decreased risk of further decompensation and death.

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

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

Appropriate and Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use in Decompensated Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Patients with decompensated cirrhosis are prescribed numerous medications. Data are limited as to whether patients are receiving medications they need and avoiding those they do not. We examined a large national claims database (2010-2015) to characterize the complete medication profile as well as the factors associated with appropriate and potentially inappropriate medication use in 12,621 patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Clinical guidelines and existing literature were used to determine appropriate and potentially inappropriate medications in decompensated cirrhosis. The total medication days' supply was calculated from pharmacy data and divided by the follow-up period for each decompensation. Ascites was the most common (86.5%), followed by hepatic encephalopathy (HE; 37.8%), variceal bleeding (VB; 17.5%), hepatorenal syndrome (6.3%), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP; 6.1%). For patients with ascites, 55.8% filled a diuretic. For patients with HE, 32.4% and 63.3% filled rifaximin and lactulose, respectively. After VB, 60.3% of patients filled a nonselective beta blocker, and after an episode of SBP, 48.0% of patients filled an antibiotic for prophylaxis. The minority (4.5%-17.3%) had enough medication to cover >50% follow-up days. Potentially inappropriate medication use was common: 53.2% filled an opiate, 46.0% proton pump inhibitors, 14.2% benzodiazepines, and 10.1% nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Disease severity markers were associated with more appropriate mediation use but not consistently associated with less inappropriate medication use.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with decompensated cirrhosis are not filling indicated medications as often or as long as is recommended and are also filling medications that are potentially harmful. Future steps include integrating pharmacy records with medical records to obtain a complete medication list and counseling on medication use with patients at each visit.

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

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

Primary prevention of variceal bleeding in people with oesophageal varices due to liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years. There are several different treatments to prevent bleeding, including: beta-blockers, endoscopic sclerotherapy, and variceal band ligation. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for prevention of first variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for prevention of first variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers to December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices with no history of bleeding.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices with no history of bleeding. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previous bleeding from oesophageal varices and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation or previously received prophylactic treatment for oesophageal varices.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR), and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed the direct comparisons from randomised clinical trials using the same codes and the same technical details.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 66 randomised clinical trials (6653 participants) in the review. Sixty trials (6212 participants) provided data for one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those at high risk of bleeding from oesophageal varices. The follow-up in the trials that reported outcomes ranged from 6 months to 60 months. All but one of the trials were at high risk of bias. The interventions compared included beta-blockers, no active intervention, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates, nitrates, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, and portocaval shunt. Overall, 21.2% of participants who received non-selective beta-blockers ('beta-blockers') - the reference treatment (chosen because this was the most common treatment compared in the trials) - died during 8-month to 60-month follow-up. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, and beta-blockers plus nitrates all had lower mortality versus no active intervention (beta-blockers: HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.67; direct comparison HR: 0.59, 95% CrI 0.42 to 0.83; 10 trials, 1200 participants; variceal band ligation: HR 0.51, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.74; direct comparison HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.12 to 2.14; 3 trials, 355 participants; sclerotherapy: HR 0.66, 95% CrI 0.51 to 0.85; direct comparison HR 0.61, 95% CrI 0.41 to 0.90; 18 trials, 1666 participants; beta-blockers plus nitrates: HR 0.41, 95% CrI 0.20 to 0.85; no direct comparison). No trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation had a higher number of serious adverse events (number of events) than beta-blockers (rate ratio 10.49, 95% CrI 2.83 to 60.64; 1 trial, 168 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers plus nitrates had a higher number of 'any adverse events (number of participants)' than beta-blockers alone (OR 3.41, 95% CrI 1.11 to 11.28; 1 trial, 57 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, adverse events (number of events) were higher in sclerotherapy than in beta-blockers (rate ratio 2.49, 95% CrI 1.53 to 4.22; direct comparison rate ratio 2.47, 95% CrI 1.27 to 5.06; 2 trials, 90 participants), and in beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation than in beta-blockers (direct comparison rate ratio 1.72, 95% CrI 1.08 to 2.76; 1 trial, 140 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, any variceal bleed was lower in beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation than in beta-blockers (direct comparison HR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.04 to 0.71; 1 trial, 173 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, any variceal bleed was higher in nitrates than beta-blockers (direct comparison HR 6.40, 95% CrI 1.58 to 47.42; 1 trial, 52 participants). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, and beta-blockers plus nitrates may decrease mortality compared to no intervention in people with high-risk oesophageal varices in people with cirrhosis and no previous history of bleeding. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in a higher number of serious adverse events than beta-blockers. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of beta-blockers versus variceal band ligation on variceal bleeding. The evidence also indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in most of the remaining comparisons.

Impact of variceal eradication on rebleeding and prognosis in cirrhotic patients undergoing secondary prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic therapy has been widely applied to prevent variceal rebleeding, but data addressing the effect of endoscopic variceal eradication (VE) are lacking. We aimed to clarify the clinical impact of VE and reveal the long-term incidence and mortality of gastrointestinal rebleeding.

METHODS

This prospective study included 228 cirrhotic patients who underwent secondary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding and achieved VE through a systematic procedure we proposed as endoscopic sequential therapy (EST). Rebleeding rates before and after VE were compared and cumulative incidence of rebleeding and mortality were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A logistic regression model and P for trend were used to investigate the optimal time limit for VE.

RESULTS

During a median (interquartile range) follow-up duration of 33.0 (23.0-48.75) months, rebleeding was identified in 28 patients (12.3%) after VE and in 27 patients (11.8%) during endoscopic sessions. The cumulative incidence of rebleeding before and after VE was 8.4% and 1.8% at 6 months, and 14.9% and 4.0% at 1 year respectively (P<0.001). The long-term incidence of all-cause/variceal rebleeding following VE was 10.4%/9.1%, and 31.5%/23.5% at 2 and 5 years respectively. Eleven patients (4.8%) died and the 5-year mortality was 9.3%. VE achieved within 6 months was associated with fewer rebleeding events compared to VE achieved after 6 months (5.5% vs. 20.0%, P=0.002), while logistic regression revealed an overall increasing trend in the odds ratio of rebleeding (vs. patients with VE time ≤6 months) for patients with 6< VE time ≤12 months and VE time >12 months (P for trend <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

VE further reduces rebleeding based on routine endoscopic prophylaxis and improves long-term prognosis. VE within 6 months seems to be the optimal timing and should therefore be advocated.

Secondary prevention of variceal bleeding in adults with previous oesophageal variceal bleeding due to decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years of diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, which include endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and surgical portocaval shunts, among others. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for secondary prevention of variceal bleeding in adults with previous oesophageal variceal bleeding due to decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for secondary prevention according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and a previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had no previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices, previous history of bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those who had acute bleeding at the time of treatment, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 48 randomised clinical trials (3526 participants) in the review. Forty-six trials (3442 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies. The follow-up ranged from two months to 61 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 12 interventions were compared in these trials (sclerotherapy, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, no active intervention, TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt), beta-blockers plus nitrates, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy plus nitrates). Overall, 22.5% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) of sclerotherapy died during the follow-up period ranging from two months to 61 months. There was considerable uncertainty in the effects of interventions on mortality. Accordingly, none of the interventions showed superiority over another. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in fewer serious adverse events (number of people) than sclerotherapy (OR 0.19; 95% CrI 0.06 to 0.54; 1 trial; 100 participants). Based on low or very low-certainty evidence, the adverse events (number of participants) and adverse events (number of events) may be different across many comparisons; however, these differences are due to very small trials at high risk of bias showing large differences in some comparisons leading to many differences despite absence of direct evidence. Based on low-certainty evidence, TIPS may result in large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation (HR 0.12; 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.41; 1 trial; 58 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, any variceal rebleed was probably lower in sclerotherapy than in no active intervention (HR 0.62; 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.99, direct comparison HR 0.66; 95% CrI 0.11 to 3.13; 3 trials; 296 participants), beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy than sclerotherapy alone (HR 0.60; 95% CrI 0.37 to 0.95; direct comparison HR 0.50; 95% CrI 0.07 to 2.96; 4 trials; 231 participants); TIPS than sclerotherapy (HR 0.18; 95% CrI 0.08 to 0.38; direct comparison HR 0.22; 95% CrI 0.01 to 7.51; 2 trials; 109 participants), and in portocaval shunt than sclerotherapy (HR 0.21; 95% CrI 0.05 to 0.77; no direct comparison) groups. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more, other compensation, events than sclerotherapy (rate ratio 2.37; 95% CrI 1.35 to 4.67; 1 trial; 65 participants and rate ratio 2.30; 95% CrI 1.20 to 4.65; 2 trials; 109 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions including those related to beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation in the remaining comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions on mortality. Variceal band ligation might result in fewer serious adverse events than sclerotherapy. TIPS might result in a large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation. Sclerotherapy probably results in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than no active intervention. Beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy and TIPS probably result in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than sclerotherapy. Beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more other compensation events than sclerotherapy. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons. Accordingly, high-quality randomised comparative clinical trials are needed.

Adherence to Non-Selective Beta Blockers for Prevention of Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Long-term use of non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) is essential for the prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis but may impair the patient's adherence. The present study aimed to investigate the adherence to NSBBs to prevent variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

All patients who had an indication of NSBBs for the prophylaxis of variceal bleeding between February 2018 and June 2019 were screened. Clinical pharmacists gave pre-medication education and recorded the adherence to NSBBs during the patients' hospitalizations. Factors associated with poor adherence were evaluated by univariate logistic regression analysis. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. The relationship between poor adherence during follow-up and variceal bleeding after discharge was also evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 108 patients were screened, of whom 12 were intolerant to NSBBs. Among the 96 remaining patients who could take NSBBs, the average change of heart rate after NSBBs was -10.49 b.p.m. Twenty-two (22.9%) patients had poor adherence to NSBBs due to their refusal to take NSBBs (n = 2), complete forgetfulness to take NSBBs (n = 10), and refusal or forgetfulness to monitor heart rate (n = 10). Univariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that only older age was significantly associated with poor adherence (OR: 1.065, 95% CI: 1.019-1.114, P = 0.005). Patients with poor adherence during follow-up were more likely to develop variceal bleeding after discharge.

CONCLUSION

A significant proportion of cirrhotic patients had poor adherence to NSBBs during their hospitalizations. Further studies should explore how to improve the patient's adherence to NSBBs.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Primary prevention of bleeding from esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis: An update and review of the literature

All patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension should be stratified by risk groups to individualize different therapeutic strategies to increase the effectiveness of treatment. In this regard, the development of primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding and its management according to the severity of portal hypertension may be promising. This paper is to describe the modern principles of primary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. The PubMed and EMbase databases, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were used to search for relevant publications from 1999 to 2019. The results suggested that depending on the severity of portal hypertension, patients with cirrhosis should be divided into those who need preprimary prophylaxis, which aims to prevent the formation of esophageal varices, and those who require measures that aim to prevent esophageal variceal bleeding. In subclinical portal hypertension, therapy should be etiological and pathogenetic. Cirrhosis with clinically significant portal hypertension should receive nonselective β-blockers if they have small esophageal varices and risk factors for variceal bleeding. Nonselective β-blockers are the first-line drugs for the primary prevention of bleeding from medium to large-sized esophageal varices. Endoscopic band ligation is indicated for the patients who are intolerant to nonselective β-blockers or in the case of contraindications to pharmacological therapy. In summary, the stratification of cirrhotic patients by the severity of portal hypertension and an individual approach to the choice of treatment may increase the effectiveness of therapy as well as improve survival rate of these patients.

Portal hypertensive gastropathy is associated with iron deficiency anemia

Background and aims

Portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) is common in patients with cirrhosis and may cause bleeding. This study systematically explored the independent impact of patient characteristics, portal hypertension and hepatic dysfunction on PHG severity and associated anemia.

Methods

Patients with cirrhosis undergoing endoscopy were included in this retrospective analysis and PHG was endoscopically graded as absent, mild or severe. Clinical and laboratory parameters and hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) were assessed with respect to an association with severity of PHG.

Results

A total of 110 patients (mean age: 57 years, 69% male) with mostly alcoholic liver disease (49%) or viral hepatitis (30%) were included: 15 (13.6%) patients had no PHG, 59 (53.6%) had mild PHG, and 36 (32.7%) had severe PHG. Severe PHG was significantly associated with male sex (83.3% vs. 62.2% in no or mild PHG; p = 0.024) and higher Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) stage (CTP-C: 38.9% vs. 27.0% in no or mild PHG; p = 0.030), while MELD was similar (p = 0.253). Patients with severe PHG had significantly lower hemoglobin values (11.2 ± 0.4 g/dL vs. 12.4 ± 0.2 g/dL; p = 0.008) and a higher prevalence of iron-deficiency anemia (IDA: 48.5% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.032). Interestingly, HVPG was not significantly higher in severe PHG (median 20 mm Hg) vs. mild PHG (19 mm Hg) and no PHG (18 mm Hg; p = 0.252). On multivariate analysis, CTP score (odds ratio, OR: 1.25, 95% confidence interval, CI 1.02–1.53; p = 0.033) was independently associated with severe PHG, while only a trend towards an independent association with IDA was observed (OR: 2.28, 95% CI 0.91–5.72; p = 0.078).

Conclusion

The CTP score but not HVPG or MELD were risk factors for severe PHG. Importantly, anemia and especially IDA are significantly more common in patients with severe PHG.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00508-019-01593-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Gut-liver axis signaling in portal hypertension

Portal hypertension (PHT) in advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) results from increased intrahepatic resistance caused by pathologic changes of liver tissue composition (structural component) and intrahepatic vasoconstriction (functional component). PHT is an important driver of hepatic decompensation such as development of ascites or variceal bleeding. Dysbiosis and an impaired intestinal barrier in ACLD facilitate translocation of bacteria and pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) that promote disease progression via immune system activation with subsequent induction of proinflammatory and profibrogenic pathways. Congestive portal venous blood flow represents a critical pathophysiological mechanism linking PHT to increased intestinal permeability: The intestinal barrier function is affected by impaired microcirculation, neoangiogenesis, and abnormal vascular and mucosal permeability. The close bidirectional relationship between the gut and the liver has been termed “gut-liver axis”. Treatment strategies targeting the gut-liver axis by modulation of microbiota composition and function, intestinal barrier integrity, as well as amelioration of liver fibrosis and PHT are supposed to exert beneficial effects. The activation of the farnesoid X receptor in the liver and the gut was associated with beneficial effects in animal experiments, however, further studies regarding efficacy and safety of pharmacological FXR modulation in patients with ACLD are needed. In this review, we summarize the clinical impact of PHT on the course of liver disease, discuss the underlying pathophysiological link of PHT to gut-liver axis signaling, and provide insight into molecular mechanisms that may represent novel therapeutic targets.

Transjugular aspiration liver biopsy performed by hepatologists trained in HVPG measurements is safe and provides important diagnostic information

BACKGROUND

Transjugular liver biopsy (TJLB) represents an alternative to percutaneous liver biopsy especially in patients with impaired coagulation and ascites.

AIMS

To describe safety and diagnostic yield of aspiration TJLB performed by hepatologists experienced in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurements.

METHODS

445 TJLB of 399 patients between 01/2007-12/2016 were retrospectively assessed.

RESULTS

Histological diagnosis was obtained in 423 (95.1%) biopsies - including 11 (100%) patients with acute liver failure and 34 (97.1%) patients after liver transplantation. A median number of 5 portal tracts (interquartile range:2-9) was obtained. HVPG negatively correlated with sample length (Spearman ρ = -0.310; p < 0.001) and number of portal tracts (ρ = -0.212; p < 0.001). Among n = 151 patients with unknown etiology of liver disease, etiology was successfully identified on liver histology in 126 patients (83.4%). Complications occurred in 28 biopsies (6.3%) including 25 (5.6%) minor and 3 (0.7%) major complications. No deaths due to TJLB were observed. Neither the presence of ascites (6.6% complications) nor of coagulopathy (platelets<50G/L and/or prothrombin time<50%; 4.8% complications) increased the risk for complications.

CONCLUSIONS

TJLB performed by hepatologists experienced in HVPG measurements is safe - even in patients with ascites or coagulopathy. TJLB has good diagnostic value for histological evaluation of liver disease and acute liver failure.

Ascitic fluid polymorphic nuclear cell count impacts on outcome of cirrhotic patients with ascites

Background

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is defined as an ascitic polymorphonuclear cell count (A-PMN) > 250 cells/µl.

Objective

We aimed to investigate the prognostic value of ascitic fluid cell counts in patients without SBP.

Patients and methods

A total of 178 patients were included and stratified by ascitic cell counts at index paracentesis: A-LEUK-low (<250/µl), A-LEUK-intermediate (250-500/µl) and A-LEUK-SBP (>500/µl) for leukocytes; A-PMN-low (<125/µl), A-PMN-intermediate (125-250/µl) and A-PMN-SBP (>250/µl) for PMN cells.

Results

One-year mortality was comparable between group A-LEUK-SBP (53.9%) and patients with subclinical cell counts (34.5% for A-LEUK-low, 43.5% for A-LEUK-intermediate, log-rank p = 0.547). However, we observed an increase in one-year mortality already in group A-PMN-intermediate with 75% and A-PMN-SBP with 80.9% (vs 40.5% for A-PMN-low, log-rank p = 0.016).Importantly, increases of A-PMN cell counts between two paracenteses were associated with increased mortality: per 100 cells/µl increase of absolute A-PMN cell count: hazard ratio (HR): 1.03 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.06), p = 0.005; per 5% increase of relative PMN cell count: HR: 1.15 (95% CI: 1.06-1.26), p = 0.001.

Conclusion

Patients with PMN cell counts of 125-250/µl are at high risk for mortality, which was very similar to SBP patients with PMN cell counts >250/µl. This highlights the need for preventive strategies. The prognostic value of changes in relative ascitic PMN cell counts should be evaluated in future studies.

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.

Small Esophageal Varices in Patients with Cirrhosis-Should We Treat Them?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The natural history and classification systems of small varices (≤ 5 mm in diameter) in cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension are summarized. Studies that assessed the course of and therapeutic intervention for small varices are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current non-invasive methods show suboptimal sensitivity to detect small varices in patients with cirrhosis. Next to etiological therapy, hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG)-guided non-selective betablocker or carvedilol treatment has shown to impact on natural history of small varices.

SUMMARY

The main therapeutic focus in cirrhotic patients with small varices is the cure of the underlying etiology. The optimal management of small varices should include measurement of HVPG. A pharmacological decrease in HVPG by non-selective betablocker therapy of ≥ 10% reduces the risk of progression to large varices, first variceal bleeding, and hepatic decompensation. If HVPG is not available, we would recommend carvedilol 12.5 mg q.d. for treatment of small varices in compensated patients without severe ascites. Only if small esophageal varices (EV) are not treated or in hemodynamic non-responders, follow-up endoscopies should be performed in 1-2 years of intervals considering the activity of liver disease or if hepatic decompensation occurs.

Gut-Liver Axis Links Portal Hypertension to Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is considered a distinct syndrome in patients with liver disease, with systemic inflammation playing a central role. Portal hypertension (PHT) is also aggravated by inflammation and may subsequently impact the course of ACLF. PHT is more than just an increase in portal pressure in the portal venous system; it aggravates the course of liver disease and, thus, also facilitates the development of acute decompensation and ACLF. A critical mechanistic link between PHT and ACLF might be the gut-liver axis, which is discussed in this review.