The effect of 1 month of therapy with midodrine, octreotide-LAR and albumin in refractory ascites: a pilot study

Effect of midodrine on HVPG in advanced chronic liver disease and acute-on-chronic liver failure-A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) are the mainstay for treatment of portal hypertension (PH), but require caution in decompensated cirrhosis (DC) or acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) with hypotension, hyponatremia, acute kidney injury (AKI) or type 2 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). Midodrine is oral, rapidly acting, α1-adrenergic agonist. We evaluated acute effects of midodrine on hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in DC and ACLF with contraindications to NSBB.

METHODS

Patients of DC (n = 30) with grade III ascites and serum sodium (Na) <130/systolic blood pressure (SBP) <90/type II HRS (group I) and ACLF patients (n = 30) with Na <130/SBP <90/AKI (group II) were included. HVPG was done at baseline and repeated 3 h after 10 mg midodrine. Primary outcome was HVPG response (reduction by >20% or to <12 mmHg).

RESULTS

In group I, midodrine significantly reduced HVPG (19.2 ± 4.6 to 17.8 ± 4.2, p = .02) and heart rate (HR) (86.3 ± 11.6 to 77.9 ± 13.1, p < .01) and increased mean arterial pressure (MAP) (74.1 ± 6.9 to 81.9 ± 6.6 mmHg, p < .01). In group II also, midodrine reduced HVPG (19.1 ± 4.1 to 17.0 ± 4.2) and HR (92.4 ± 13.7 to 84.6 ± 14.1) and increased MAP (85.4 ± 7.3 to 91.2 ± 7.6 mmHg), p < .01 for all. HVPG response was achieved in 3/30 (10%) in group I and 8/30 (26.7%) in group II. On logistic regression analysis, prerenal AKI (OR 11.04, 95% CI 1.83-66.18, p < .01) and increase in MAP (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03-1.43, p = .02) were independent predictors of response. Increase in MAP by 8.5 mmHg with midodrine had best cut-off with AUROC of .76 for response.

CONCLUSION

In decompensated cirrhosis and ACLF patients with contraindications to NSBB, midodrine is useful in decreasing HVPG. Dose of midodrine should be titrated to increase MAP atleast by 8.5 mmHg.

Role of albumin infusion in cirrhosis-associated complications

Cirrhosis is an advanced-stage liver disease that occurs due to persistent physiological insults such as excessive alcohol consumption, infections, or toxicity. It is characterised by scar tissue formation, portal hypertension, and ascites (accumulation of fluid in the abdominal cavity) in decompensated cirrhosis. This review evaluates how albumin infusion ameliorates cirrhosis-associated complications. Since albumin is an oncotic plasma protein, albumin infusion allows movement of water into the intravascular space, aids with fluid resuscitation, and thereby contributes to resolving cirrhosis-induced hypovolemia (loss of extracellular fluid) seen in ascites. Thus, albumin infusion helps prevent paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction, a complication that occurs when treating ascites. When cirrhosis advances, other complications such as spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and hepatorenal syndrome can manifest. Infused albumin helps mitigate these by exhibiting plasma expansion, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory functions. In hepatic encephalopathy, albumin infusion is thought to improve cognitive function by reducing ammonia concentration in blood and thereby tackle cirrhosis-induced hepatocyte malfunction in ammonia clearance. Infused albumin can also exhibit protective effects by binding to the cirrhosis-induced proinflammatory cytokines TNFα and IL6. While albumin administration has shown to prolong overall survival of cirrhotic patients with ascites in the ANSWER trial, the ATTIRE and MACHT trials have shown either no effect or limitations such as development of pulmonary oedema and multiorgan failure.  Thus, albumin infusion is not a generic treatment option for all cirrhosis patients. Interestingly, cirrhosis-induced structural alterations in native albumin (which lead to formation of different albumin isoforms) can be used as prognostic biomarkers because specific albumin isoforms indicate certain complications of decompensated cirrhosis.

Midodrine reduces new-onset acute kidney injury and hyponatremia in children with cirrhosis and ascites awaiting liver transplantation: Results from an open-label RCT

OBJECTIVES

Midodrine, an oral α-1-adrenergic receptor agonist, counters arterial hypovolemia and reduces complications in adult patients with cirrhosis. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of midodrine in preventing complications and improving survival in children with cirrhosis and ascites who are awaiting liver transplantation (LT).

METHODS

This open-label RCT conducted from January 2022 to May 2023 included children under 18 years with cirrhosis and ascites. Patients were randomized to receive either midodrine plus standard medical therapies (SMTs) or SMT alone. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of cirrhosis-related complications within 6 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-five subjects were enrolled and randomized. Patients in the midodrine arm had a lower incidence of new-onset acute kidney injury (AKI) compared with the SMT arm (11.1% vs. 41.2%). Patients in the midodrine arm showed a decline in serum creatinine and improvement in glomerular filtration rate, whereas no changes were observed in the SMT arm. There was a lower incidence of new-onset hyponatremia in the midodrine arm (20% vs. 56%). Midodrine led to reduction in plasma rennin activity (PRA) and improvement in systemic hemodynamics. There was no difference in the rate of resolution of ascites, recurrence of ascites, requirement of therapeutic paracentesis, cumulative albumin infusion requirement, episodes of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatic encephalopathy between the two arms.

CONCLUSION

Midodrine, when added to SMT, was effective in reducing the incidence of new-onset AKI and hyponatremia in pediatric cirrhotics awaiting LT. It also improved systemic hemodynamics and showed a trend towards reducing PRA.

Midodrine in Liver Cirrhosis With Ascites: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ascites is the most common complication of liver cirrhosis. Midodrine is a vasoconstrictor that improves splanchnic and systemic hemodynamics, reduces ascites, and improves clinical outcomes. Here, we aimed to examine the role of midodrine in cirrhosis-related ascites.

Scopus, Embase, PubMed, and PubMed Central databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials comparing midodrine with other interventions in patients with cirrhotic ascites on November 25, 2020, using appropriate keywords like “midodrine”, “ascitic cirrhosis”, “peritoneal paracentesis” and suitable Boolean operators. Odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) were used to analyze pool data as appropriate with a 95% confident interval (CI).

A total of 14 studies were included in our analysis including 1199 patients. The addition of midodrine resulted in statistically significant improvement in mean arterial pressure (MAP) (MD, 3.95 mmHg; 95% CI, 1.53-6.36) and MELD (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease) score (MD, -1.27; 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.04) compared to standard medical treatment (SMT). There was also a significant improvement in plasma renin activity and plasma aldosterone concentration. However, there was no significant improvement in mortality or serum creatinine compared to SMT. In addition, there was no statistically significant improvement in MAP, plasma renin activity, plasma aldosterone concentration, MELD score, overall mortality, and paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction comparing midodrine with albumin.

Midodrine alone leads to significant improvement in various clinical parameters in patients with cirrhotic ascites compared to standard medical care. At the same time, it was found to be non-inferior to albumin. Therefore, further well-designed studies need to be carried out on midodrine in addition to albumin for optimal clinical benefits among patients with ascites due to cirrhosis.

Management of Flood syndrome: What can we do better?

Approximately 20% of cirrhotic patients with ascites develop umbilical herniation. These patients usually suffer from multisystemic complications of cirrhosis, have a significantly higher risk of infection, and require accurate surveillance– especially in the context of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The rupture of an umbilical hernia, is an uncommon, life-threatening complication of large-volume ascites and end-stage liver disease resulting in spontaneous paracentesis, also known as Flood syndrome. Flood syndrome remains a challenging condition for clinicians, as recommendations for its management are lacking, and the available evidence for the best treatment approach remains controversial. In this paper, four key questions are addressed regarding the management and prevention of Flood syndrome: (1) Which is the best treatment approach–conservative treatment or urgent surgery? (2) How can we establish the individual risk for herniation and possible hernia rupture in cirrhotic patients? (3) How can we prevent umbilical hernia ruptures? And (4) How can we manage these patients in the conditions created by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic?

Paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction: are there albumin alternatives?

Background

Ascites is one of the main complications of advanced liver cirrhosis. It is defined as a pathological accumulation if free fluid in the peritoneal cavity.

Main body of the abstract

Ascites is a sign of decompensation in patients with liver cirrhosis and is associated with decreased survival. Ascites is associated with bad cosmetic figure and poor quality of life. Ascites is a predisposing factor for developing hydrothorax, hernias, diastolic dysfunction, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and renal impairment especially hepatorenal syndrome. The main treatment is salt restriction and diuretics. By the time the patient become non-responder and develop tense ascites, abdominal large volume paracentesis is the treatment of choice. Its advantages are rapid, cheap, and 1 day hospitalization. The main drawback is the development of paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction (PICD) if no volume expanding drugs are used. PICD is associated with dilutional hyponatremia, renal impairment, so it is considered the silent killer. Albumin infusion is the standard preventive measure but since costly to other alternatives such as colloids, vasoconstrictors or lowering the standard doses of the albumin was studied and is promising.

Conclusions

This review summarized the effectiveness of other alternative drugs.

Effect of alpha agonists on the prevention of postparacentesis circulatory dysfunction in patients with refractory or recurrent ascites: a meta-analysis

Postparacentesis circulatory dysfunction (PCD) is one of the commonest complications encountered in patients with refractory or recurrent ascites. Alpha agonists like clonidine and midodrine have been studied in various clinical trials for the prevention of PCD with varied results. This meta-analysis was done to evaluate the effect of alpha agonists on prevention of PCD in patients of refractory or recurrent ascites. A standard meta-analysis protocol was developed and registered in the International Prospective register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews. After performing a comprehensive literature search in MEDLINE, Cochrane, and International Clinical Trial Registry Platform, reviewers assessed eligibility and extracted data from five relevant articles. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed in selection, analysis, and reporting of findings. Random effects model was used to estimate effect size. Quality assessment was done using the risk of bias assessment tool and meta-regression for probable variables affecting effect size. The random effect model analysis revealed a mean reduction of 2.63 ng/ml/h (95% CI: -4.46 to -0.8; P = 0.005) in plasma renin activity (PRA), mean reduction of 255.37 pg/ml (95% CI: -441.23 to -69.5; P = 0.007) in plasma aldosterone levels, and a mean increase of 0.14 mg/dl (95% CI: -0.13 to 0.41; P = 0.32) in serum creatinine levels favouring add-on alpha agonist group. In meta-regression, change in PRA (P = 0.79) and plasma aldosterone (P = 0.93) did not show a significant difference due to variation in follow-up duration across various studies. Add-on alpha agonists bring about a significant reduction in PRA and plasma aldosterone compared to standard medical treatment and thus prevents the occurrence of PCD in patients with refractory or recurrent ascites.

Oral midodrine is comparable to albumin infusion in cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites undergoing large-volume paracentesis: results of a pilot study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Albumin infusion reduces the incidence of postparacentesis circulatory dysfunction among patients with cirrhosis and tense ascites compared with no treatment. Less costly treatment alternatives such as vasoconstrictors have been investigated, but the results are controversial. Midodrine, an oral α1-adrenergic agonist, increases effective circulating blood volume and renal perfusion by increasing systemic and splanchnic blood pressure. Our aim is to assess whether or not morbidity in terms of renal dysfunction, hyponatremia, systemic, or portal hemodynamics derangement or mortality differed in patients receiving albumin versus midodrine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-five patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites were randomized to receive albumin infusion, oral midodrine for 2 days, or oral midodrine for 30 days after therapeutic large volume paracentesis (LVP). The primary endpoints were development of renal impairment or hyponatremia, change in systemic and portal hemodynamics, cost, and mortality in the short-term and long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between groups in the development of renal impairment, hyponatremia, or mortality 6 and 30 days after LVP. A significant increase in 24-h urine sodium excretion was noted in the midodrine 30-day group. Renal perfusion improved significantly with the midodrine intake for 30 days only. The cost of midodrine therapy was significantly lower than albumin.

CONCLUSION

Midodrine is as effective as albumin in reducing morbidity and mortality among patients with refractory ascites undergoing LVP at a significantly lower cost. Long-duration midodrine intake can be more useful than shorter duration intake in terms of improvement of renal perfusion and sodium excretion.

Management of refractory cirrhotic ascites: challenges and solutions

Among the various risky complications of liver cirrhosis, refractory ascites is associated with poor survival of cirrhotics and persistently worsens their quality of life (QOL). Major clinical guidelines worldwide define refractory ascites as ascites that cannot be managed by medical therapy either because of a lack of response to maximum doses of diuretics or because patients develop complications related to diuretic therapy that preclude the use of an effective dose of diuretics. Due to the difficulty in receiving a liver transplantation (LT), the ultimate solution for refractory ascites, most cirrhotic patients have selected the palliative therapy such as repeated serial paracentesis, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, or peritoneovenous shunt to improve their QOL. During the past several decades, new interventions and methodologies, such as indwelling peritoneal catheter, peritoneal-urinary drainage, and cell-free and concentrated ascites reinfusion therapy, have been introduced. In addition, new medical treatments with vasoconstrictors or vasopressin V2 receptor antagonists have been proposed. Both the benefits and risks of these old and new modalities have been extensively studied in relation to the pathophysiological changes in ascites formation. Although the best solution for refractory ascites is to eliminate hepatic failure either by LT or by causal treatment, the selection of the best palliative therapy for individual patients is of utmost importance, aiming at achieving the longest possible, comfortable life. This review briefly summarizes the changing landscape of variable treatment modalities for cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites, aiming at clarifying their possibilities and limitations. Evolving issues with regard to the impact of gut-derived systemic and local infection on the clinical course of cirrhotic patients have paved the way for the development of a new gut microbiome-based therapeutics. Thus, it should be further investigated whether the early therapeutic approach to gut dysbiosis provides a better solution for the management of cirrhotic ascites.

Role of albumin in cirrhosis: from a hospitalist's perspective

Albumin, a negatively charged globular protein encoded on chromosome 4, is one of the most abundant proteins in the plasma and accounts for approximately 75% of plasma oncotic pressure. The role of albumin in the management of various disease states has shown to be beneficial historically. Low serum albumin is a predictor of mortality and poor outcomes. In cirrhotics undergoing paracentesis, albumin infusion prevents rapid re-accumulation of ascitic fluid while simultaneously decreasing the risk of post-paracentesis related circulatory dysfunction. Additionally, albumin is utilized in patients with hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). Overall, albumin appears to be an effective pharmacological agent in the management of cirrhosis and its complications.

Midodrine and tolvaptan in patients with cirrhosis and refractory or recurrent ascites: a randomised pilot study

BACKGROUND

Splanchnic arterial vasodilatation and subsequent sodium and water retention play an important role in cirrhotic ascites. Midodrine and tolvaptan have been used separately in these patients. However, there are no reports on the use of combination of midodrine and tolvaptan in the control of ascites. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of midodrine, tolvaptan and their combination in control of refractory or recurrent ascites in cirrhotics.

METHODS

Fifty cirrhotic patients with refractory or recurrent ascites were randomised to receive midodrine (n=13), tolvaptan (n=12) or both (n=13) plus standard medical therapy (SMT) or SMT alone (n=12).

RESULTS

A significant increase in urinary volume and urinary sodium at 1 and 3 months (P<.05) was observed in all groups except SMT. There was no worsening of renal or hepatic function in any group. There was deterioration of model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) in SMT. Midodrine as well as combination of midodrine and tolvaptan but not tolvaptan alone was superior to SMT in control of ascites at 3 months (P<.05). The combination therapy was also superior to midodrine in the control of ascites at 1 month. The morbidity and mortality were similar in all the groups except SMT.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this pilot study suggest that midodrine and combination with tolvaptan better controls ascites without any renal or hepatic dysfunction. The combination therapy rapidly controls ascites as compared to midodrine or tolvaptan alone.

Effect of different therapeutic modalities on systemic, renal, and hepatic hemodynamics and short-term outcomes in cirrhotic patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) is a major risk factor for hepatorenal syndrome. Albumin infusion has been shown to prevent renal impairment and reduce mortality in SBP. The study aimed to compare the effect of different therapeutic modalities on hemodynamics and short clinical outcomes in high-risk patients with SBP.

METHODS

Two hundred cirrhotic patients with SBP and bilirubin greater than 4 mg[Fraction Slash]dl or creatinine more than 1 mg[Fraction Slash]dl were enrolled. Patients were randomized to receive albumin, terlipressin, low-dose albumin plus terlipressin, or midodrine. Systemic, renal, and hepatic hemodynamics were estimated at baseline, 3, and 10 days of treatment. Renal impairment was diagnosed when the blood urea nitrogen or serum creatinine levels increased by more than 50% of the pretreatment value.

RESULTS

SBP resolved in most of patients in all groups (P>0.05). Cardiac output and portal flow decreased, whereas systemic vascular resistance increased significantly in terlipressin and albumin plus terlipressin groups compared with the albumin group after 3 and 10 days. After 10 days, plasma renin activity, renal, and hepatic arteries resistive index were significantly higher in the midodrine group compared with the albumin group. The midodrine group did not show any significant changes in the heart rate, mean arterial pressure, cardiac output, and portal blood flow compared with the albumin group after 3 or 10 days. There was no significant difference in renal impairment or mortality between any of the groups.

CONCLUSION

Terlipressin and low-dose albumin plus terlipressin could be used as a therapeutic alternative to standard-dose albumin in high-risk SBP patients.

Effects of midodrine in patients with ascites due to cirrhosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Midodrine has been reported to improve systemic and renal hemodynamics in patients with cirrhotic ascites. However, the results of clinical trials are conflicting. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of midodrine on cirrhotic ascites through a meta-analysis and systematic review.

METHODS

We searched PubMed (January 1966-December 2014), EMBASE (January 1966-December 2014), the Cochrane Library (Issue 11, 2014), ScienceDirect (January 1966-December 2014), and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (January 1979-December 2014) databases using the terms 'midodrine' AND 'cirrhosis' AND 'ascites' AND 'paracentesis' for all relevant randomized controlled trials using midodrine for treatment of cirrhotic ascites.

RESULTS

In all, 10 trials with a total of 462 patients were included. As a novel therapy for cirrhotic ascites, midodrine was not found to improve survival [odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-2.91]; although it might improve response rates (OR 3.36, 95% CI 1.47-7.69) and reduce plasma renin activity (MD -3.10, 95% CI -5.37 to -0.84). When midodrine was used as an alternative to albumin in large-volume paracentesis, the mortality was higher for midodrine than for albumin (OR 10.76, 95% CI 1.35-85.97). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the development of paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction between midodrine group and albumin group (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.43-6.72).

CONCLUSIONS

Midodrine may have treatment effects on cirrhotic ascites. Better powered and well-designed trials are required to assess the extent of the efficacy of midodrine in specifically targeted patients.

Albumin treatment regimen for type 1 hepatorenal syndrome: a dose-response meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recommended treatment for type 1 hepatorenal syndrome consists of albumin and vasoconstrictor. The optimal albumin dose remains poorly characterized. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the impact of albumin dose on treatment outcomes.

METHODS

Clinical studies of type 1 hepatorenal syndrome treatment with albumin and vasoconstrictor were sought. Search terms included: hepatorenal syndrome; albumin; vasoconstrictor; terlipressin; midodrine; octreotide; noradrenaline; and norepinephrine. A meta-analysis was performed of hepatorenal syndrome reversal and survival in relation to albumin dose.

RESULTS

Nineteen clinical studies with 574 total patients were included, comprising 8 randomized controlled trials, 8 prospective studies and 3 retrospective studies. The pooled percentage of patients achieving hepatorenal syndrome reversal was 49.5% (95% confidence interval, 40.0-59.1%). Increments of 100 g in cumulative albumin dose were accompanied by significantly increased survival (hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.31; p = 0.023). A non-significant increase of similar magnitude in hepatorenal syndrome reversal was also observed (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-1.37; p = 0.10). Expected survival rates at 30 days among patients receiving cumulative albumin doses of 200, 400 and 600 g were 43.2% (95% confidence interval, 36.4-51.3%), 51.4% (95% confidence interval, 46.3-57.1%) and 59.0% (95% confidence interval, 51.9-67.2), respectively. Neither survival nor hepatorenal syndrome reversal was significantly affected by vasoconstrictor dose or type, treatment duration, age, baseline serum creatinine, bilirubin or albumin, baseline mean arterial pressure, or study design, size or time period.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests a dose-response relationship between infused albumin and survival in patients with type 1 hepatorenal syndrome. The meta-analysis provides the best current evidence on the potential role of albumin dose selection in improving outcomes of treatment for type 1 HRS and furnishes guidance for the design of future dose-ranging studies.

Midodrine and clonidine in patients with cirrhosis and refractory or recurrent ascites: a randomized pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Splanchnic arterial vasodilatation and subsequent activation of anti-natriuretic and vasoconstrictive mechanisms have an important role in cirrhotic ascites. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of midodrine, clonidine, and their combination on systemic hemodynamics, renal function, and control of ascites in patients with cirrhosis and refractory or recurrent ascites.

METHODS

Sixty cirrhotic patients with refractory or recurrent ascites were prospectively studied after long-term administration of clonidine (n=15) or midodrine (n=15), or both (n=15) plus standard medical therapy (SMT), or SMT alone (n=15), in a randomized controlled trial at a tertiary center.

RESULTS

A significant increase in urinary volume, urinary sodium excretion, mean arterial pressure, and decrease in plasma renin activity (P<0.05) was noted after 1 month. There was also a significant decrease in cardiac output (P<0.05) and increase in systemic vascular resistance (P<0.05) in all groups, except clonidine. There was no change in glomerular filtration rate and model for end-stage liver disease score. Midodrine and a combination of midodrine and clonidine plus SMT were superior to SMT alone in the control of ascites (P=0.05), and there was a trend towards better control of ascites in the clonidine group (P=0.1). The mortality and frequency of various complications were similar in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that midodrine, clonidine, and their combination plus SMT improves the systemic hemodynamics without any renal or hepatic dysfunction, and is superior to SMT alone for the control of ascites. However, the combination therapy was not superior to midodrine or clonidine alone.

The combination of octreotide and midodrine is not superior to albumin in preventing recurrence of ascites after large-volume paracentesis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Large-volume paracentesis (LVP) is the treatment of choice for patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites. However, LVP can lead to postparacentesis circulatory dysfunction (PCD), which is associated with faster ascites recurrence and renal failure. PCD results from vasodilatation, which reduces effective blood volume, and is prevented by intravenous administration of albumin. Vasoconstrictors could be used instead of albumin and, with longer use, prevent PCD and delay ascites recurrence.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare albumin with the vasoconstrictor combination of octreotide and midodrine in patients with refractory ascites who underwent LVP. Patients in the albumin group received a single intravenous dose of albumin at the time of LVP plus placebos for midodrine and octreotide (n = 13). Patients in the vasoconstrictor group received saline solution (as a placebo for albumin), 10 mg of oral midodrine (3 times/day), and a monthly 20-mg intramuscular injection of long-acting octreotide (n = 12). Patients were followed up until recurrence of ascites.

RESULTS

The median times to recurrence of ascites were 10 days in the albumin group and 8 days in the vasoconstrictor group (P = .318). There were no significant differences in PCD between the albumin group (18%) and the vasoconstrictor group (25%, P = .574). When ascites recurred, serum levels of creatinine were higher in the vasoconstrictor group (1.2 vs 0.9 mg/dL in the albumin group; P = .051).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of midodrine and octreotide after LVP is not superior to albumin in delaying recurrence of ascites or preventing PCD in patients with cirrhosis. Outcomes appear to be worse in patients given octreotide and midodrine. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00108355.

Hepatorenal syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is defined as a functional renal failure in patients with liver disease with portal hypertension and it constitutes the climax of systemic circulatory changes associated with portal hypertension. This term refers to a precisely specified syndrome featuring in particular morphologically intact kidneys, where regulatory mechanisms have minimised glomerular filtration and maximised tubular resorption and urine concentration, which ultimately results in uraemia. The syndrome occurs almost exclusively in patients with ascites. Type 1 HRS develops as a consequence of a severe reduction of effective circulating volume due to both an extreme splanchnic arterial vasodilatation and a reduction of cardiac output. Type 2 HRS is characterised by a stable or slowly progressive renal failure so that its main clinical consequence is not acute renal failure, but refractory ascites, and its impact on prognosis is less negative. Liver transplantation is the most appropriate therapeutic method, nevertheless, only a few patients can receive it. The most suitable “bridge treatments” or treatment for patients ineligible for a liver transplant include terlipressin plus albumin. Terlipressin is at an initial dose of 0.5-1 mg every 4 h by intravenous bolus to 3 mg every 4 h in cases when there is no response. Renal function recovery can be achieved in less than 50% of patients and a considerable decrease in renal function may reoccur even in patients who have been responding to therapy over the short term. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt plays only a marginal role in the treatment of HRS.

Kidneys in chronic liver diseases

Acute kidney injury (AKI), defined as an abrupt increase in the serum creatinine level by at least 0.3 mg/dL, occurs in about 20% of patients hospitalized for decompensating liver cirrhosis. Patients with cirrhosis are susceptible to developing AKI because of the progressive vasodilatory state, reduced effective blood volume and stimulation of vasoconstrictor hormones. The most common causes of AKI in cirrhosis are pre-renal azotemia, hepatorenal syndrome and acute tubular necrosis. Differential diagnosis is based on analysis of circumstances of AKI development, natriuresis, urine osmolality, response to withdrawal of diuretics and volume repletion, and rarely on renal biopsy. Chronic glomerulonephritis and obstructive uropathy are rare causes of azotemia in cirrhotic patients. AKI is one of the last events in the natural history of chronic liver disease, therefore, such patients should have an expedited referral for liver transplantation. Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is initiated by progressive portal hypertension, and may be prematurely triggered by bacterial infections, nonbacterial systemic inflammatory reactions, excessive diuresis, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, diarrhea or nephrotoxic agents. Each type of renal disease has a specific treatment approach ranging from repletion of the vascular system to renal replacement therapy. The treatment of choice in type 1 hepatorenal syndrome is a combination of vasoconstrictor with albumin infusion, which is effective in about 50% of patients. The second-line treatment of HRS involves a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, renal vasoprotection or systems of artificial liver support.

Medical management of hepatorenal syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is defined as the occurrence of renal dysfunction in a patient with end-stage liver cirrhosis in the absence of another identifiable cause of renal failure. The prognosis of HRS remains poor, with a median survival without liver transplantation of <6 months. However, understanding the pathogenesis of HRS has led to the introduction of treatments designed to increase renal perfusion and mean arterial blood pressure using vasopressors and albumin, which has led to improvement in renal function in ∼50% of patients.

Hepatorenal syndrome: the 8th International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group

Introduction

Renal dysfunction is a common complication in patients with end-stage cirrhosis. Since the original publication of the definition and diagnostic criteria for the hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), there have been major advances in our understanding of its pathogenesis. The prognosis of patients with cirrhosis who develop HRS remains poor, with a median survival without liver transplantation of less than six months. However, a number of pharmacological and other therapeutic strategies have now become available which offer the ability to prevent or treat renal dysfunction more effectively in this setting. Accordingly, we sought to review the available evidence, make recommendations and delineate key questions for future studies.

Methods

We undertook a systematic review of the literature using Medline, PubMed and Web of Science, data provided by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients and the bibliographies of key reviews. We determined a list of key questions and convened a two-day consensus conference to develop summary statements via a series of alternating breakout and plenary sessions. In these sessions, we identified supporting evidence and generated recommendations and/or directions for future research.

Results

Of the 30 questions considered, we found inadequate evidence for the majority of questions and our recommendations were mainly based on expert opinion. There was insufficient evidence to grade three questions, but we were able to develop a consensus definition for acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis and provide consensus recommendations for future investigations to address key areas of uncertainty.

Conclusions

Despite a paucity of sufficiently powered prospectively randomized trials, we were able to establish an evidence-based appraisal of this field and develop a set of consensus recommendations to standardize care and direct further research for patients with cirrhosis and renal dysfunction.

Midodrine in patients with cirrhosis and refractory or recurrent ascites: a randomized pilot study

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Splanchnic arterial vasodilatation plays an important role in cirrhotic ascites. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of long term administration of midodrine on systemic hemodynamics, renal function, and control of ascites in patients with cirrhosis and refractory or recurrent ascites.

METHODS

Forty cirrhotic patients with refractory or recurrent ascites were prospectively studied after long term administration of midodrine plus standard medical therapy (n=20) or standard medical therapy alone (n=20) in a randomized controlled trial at a tertiary centre.

RESULTS

A significant increase in urinary volume, urinary sodium excretion, mean arterial pressure, and decrease in plasma renin activity (p<0.05) was noted after 1 month of midodrine administration. There was also a significant decrease in cardiac output and an increase in systemic vascular resistance after midodrine therapy at 3 months (p<0.05). There was no change in glomerular filtration rate and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. Midodrine plus standard medical therapy was significantly superior to standard medical therapy alone in the control of ascites (p=0.013) at 3 months. The mortality rate in the standard medical therapy group was significantly higher than the midodrine group (p<0.046). There was no significant difference in the frequency of various complications at the end of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this randomized pilot study suggest that midodrine plus standard medical therapy improves the systemic hemodynamics without any renal or hepatic dysfunction in these patients and is superior to standard medical therapy alone for the control of ascites.

Management of ascites in cirrhosis

Ascites is a common complication of liver cirrhosis associated with a poor prognosis. The treatment of ascites requires dietary sodium restriction and the judicious use of distal and loop diuretics, sequential at an earlier stage of ascites, and a combination at a later stage of ascites. The diagnosis of refractory ascites requires the demonstration of diuretic non-responsiveness, despite dietary sodium restriction, or the presence of diuretic-related complications. Patients with refractory ascites require second-line treatments of repeat large-volume paracentesis (LVP) or the insertion of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and assessment for liver transplantation. Careful patient selection is paramount for TIPS to be successful as a treatment for ascites. Patients not suitable for TIPS insertion should receive LVP. The use of albumin as a volume expander is recommended for LVP of >5-6 L to prevent the development of circulatory dysfunction, although the clinical significance of post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction is still debated. Significant mortality is still being observed in cirrhotic patients with ascites and relatively preserved liver and renal function, as indicated by a lower Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. It is proposed that patients with lower MELD scores and ascites should receive additional points in calculating their priority for liver transplantation. Potential new treatment options for ascites include the use of various vasoconstrictors, vasopressin V(2) receptor antagonists, or the insertion of a peritoneo-vesical shunt, all of which could possibly improve the management of ascites.

Critical care management of patients with end-stage liver disease

OBJECTIVES

To review the management of complications related to end-stage liver disease in the intensive care unit. The goal of this review is to address topics important to the practicing physician.

DATA SOURCES

We performed an organ system-based PubMed literature review focusing on the diagnosis and treatment of critical complications of end-stage liver disease. DATA SYNTHESIS AND FINDINGS: When available, preferential consideration was given to randomized controlled trials. In the absence of trials, observational and retrospective studies and consensus opinions were included. We present our recommendations for the neurologic, cardiovascular, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, and infectious complications of end-stage liver disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications related to end-stage liver disease have significant morbidity and mortality. Management of these complications in the intensive care unit requires awareness and expertise among physicians from a wide variety of fields.

Medical management of ascites

INTRODUCTION

Ascites is a common complication of advanced cirrhosis that has a significant negative impact on survival. This review updates the reader on the medical management of ascites.

AREAS COVERED

This review explores the pathophysiology of ascites formation in cirrhosis; the current mainstays of medical management (treating the underlying cause of cirrhosis, avoiding nephrotoxic agents, sodium restriction, and combination diuretic therapy); potential novel agents, such as vasoconstrictors and vaptans; and albumin infusions. The literature research covers all aspects of medical management of ascites from the English literature, concentrating on publications from the past 10 years. It provides a thorough understanding of how the correction of pathophysiology of ascites formation helps to improve ascites; knowledge on the monitoring of patients with cirrhosis and ascites receiving medical management, and on prophylaxis against potentially life-threatening complication such as spontaneous bacterial peritonitis; and potential new treatments for ascites.

EXPERT OPINION

Management of patients with cirrhosis and ascites requires careful attention to fluid and electrolyte balance and avoidance of complications. Recognition of refractory ascites allows for the use of second-line treatments. All patients with cirrhosis and ascites should be considered for liver transplantation.

The effects of midodrine on the natriuretic response to furosemide in cirrhotics with ascites

BACKGROUND

Resistance to loop diuretics is common in patients with ascites. Diminished glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is thought to mediate resistance to loop diuretics. Midodrine, a commonly used alpha-1 agonist, has been shown to improve GFR in non-azotemic patients with cirrhosis.

AIM

To conduct a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study to test the hypothesis that midodrine significantly increases natriuretic response of IV furosemide in non-azotemic cirrhotics with ascites.

METHODS

All subjects participated in both phases, which were (i) furosemide IV infusion + oral midodrine 15 mg administered 30 min before furosemide (ii) furosemide IV infusion + oral placebo administered 30 min before furosemide. Primary outcomes were 6-h urine sodium excretion and 6-h total urine volume.

RESULTS

A total of 15 patients (men: 8; age: 52.7 ± 7.6 years; serum creatinine: 1.06 ± 0.2 mg/dL) were studied. Total 6-h urine sodium excretion was 109 ± 42 mmol in the furosemide + midodrine treatment phase and was not significantly different from that in the furosemide + placebo treatment phase (126 ± 69 mmol, P = 0.6). Similarly, mean 6-h total urine volume was not significantly different between two groups (1770 ± 262 mL vs. 1962 ± 170 mL, P = 0.25).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral midodrine does not increase the natriuretic response to furosemide in non-azotemic cirrhotic patients with ascites. Orally administered midodrine does not increase natriuretic response to furosemide in non-azotemic cirrhotic patients with ascites.

Midodrine and Octreotide in Treatment of Cirrhosis-Related Hemodynamic Complications

Objective:

To review studies evaluating the use of midodrine and octreotide in hemodynamic complications of cirrhosis, including ascites and hepatorenal syndrome.

Data Sources:

Searches of MEDLINE (1966–September 2008) and EMBASE (1974–September 2008) were conducted using the terms midodrine, octreotide, hepatorenal syndrome, ascites, cirrhosis, and paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction. Literature review was limited to English-language, human studies.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

Studies identified from data sources were considered for review. Studies were excluded if primary therapy involved any of the following: transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt procedure, medications other than midodrine or octreotide, or patients included for treatment or prevention of portal hypertension and/or variceal bleeding. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies and studies using retrospective data collection were excluded. Seven studies were included in this review.

Data Synthesis:

Midodrine and octreotide in combination or alone have shown conflicting results for systemic and renal hemodynamics and renal function in patients with cirrhosis-related complications. Patients with ascites being treated with midodrine, alone or in combination with octreotide, showed significant changes in systemic hemodynamics, without a correlating change in renal perfusion. Studies comparing the use of midodrine with use of albumin for the prevention of paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction (PICD) showed no incidence of PICD in either treatment group. In hepatorenal syndrome, patients using midodrine with octreotide showed significant changes in systemic hemodynamics and improvements in renal perfusion. This regimen's effect on survival is yet to be determined,

Conclusions:

Available evidence shows inconsistent results for the effectiveness and safety of midodrine and octreotide use in cirrhotic patients. Because of the contradictory results, longer treatment duration and increased number of study participants are necessary to determine the proper use of midodrine and octreotide in these patients.

Evaluation and management of patients with refractory ascites

Some patients with ascites due to liver cirrhosis become no longer responsive to diuretics. Once other causes of ascites such as portal vein thrombosis, malignancy or infection and non-compliance with medications and low sodium diet have been excluded, the diagnosis of refractory ascites can be made based on strict criteria. Patients with refractory ascites have very poor prognosis and therefore referral for consideration for liver transplantation should be initiated. Search for reversible components of the underlying liver pathology should be undertaken and targeted therapy, when available, should be considered. Currently, serial large volume paracentesis (LVP) and transjugular intrahepatic portasystemic stent-shunt (TIPS) are the two mainstay treatment options for refractory ascites. Other treatment options are available but not widely used either because they carry high morbidity and mortality (most surgical options) rates, or are new interventions that have shown promise but still need further evaluation. In this comprehensive review, we describe the evaluation and management of patients with refractory ascites from the prospective of the practicing physician.