Diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of hepatic sarcoidosis

The clinical management of hepatic sarcoidosis: A systematic review

Background

Hepatic sarcoidosis is an uncommon clinical condition in which clear recommendations are lacking in its treatment. We aimed to review systematically the literature on hepatic sarcoidosis treatment to guide clinicians.

Methods

Using MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases, we searched original articles on clinical studies reporting the outcome of adult hepatic sarcoidosis patients following treatment with various pharmacological agents. The primary end point was focused on assessing symptomatic relief and biochemical improvement posttreatment.

Results

Out of 614 retrieved references, 34 published studies were eligible, providing data for a total of 268 patients with hepatic sarcoidosis. First-line therapy with corticosteroids alone was reported in 187 patients, whilst ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) was used in 40 patients. Symptomatic and biochemical responses were reported among 113(60.4%) and 80(42.8%) cases of corticosteroids respectively, whereas UDCA showed a complete response in 23(57.5%) patients. Second-line therapy was used in steroid-refractory cases, with most cases being reported for azathioprine (n = 32) and methotrexate (n = 28). Notably, 15(46.9%) and 11(39.2%) patients showed both clinical and biochemical responses respectively. Biological therapy including anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) was used as third line therapy in twelve cases with a 72.7% symptomatic and biochemical response rate each.

Conclusion

The quality of evidence for the treatment of hepatic sarcoidosis was poor. Nevertheless, it appears that corticosteroid or UDCA may be utilized as first-line therapy. For cases that are refractory to corticosteroids, steroid-sparing immunosuppressive agents and anti-TNF have shown some promising results, but further high-quality studies are required.

Hepatic sarcoidosis with symptomatic portal hypertension: A report of 12 cases with review of the literature

Introduction

Sarcoidosis is a systemic granulomatosis of unknown etiology, characterized by the presence of immune granulomas. Liver damage is a relatively common extra-pulmonary manifestation, occurring in 3.6-30% of cases. Some patients can develop symptomatic portal hypertension (PH). Few series have evaluated the prognosis of symptomatic PH as well as the efficacy and safety of specific treatment on this complication.

Methods

This is a multicenter retrospective study of cases of histologically proven hepatic sarcoidosis with symptomatic PH (ascites, digestive hemorrhage) and/or hepatic encephalopathy. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, clinical manifestations of sarcoidosis, biological data, imaging study of the liver, treatment, and clinical outcomes were collected.

Results

Twelve patients were identified, with a mean follow-up of 140 months. The M/F ratio was 1 and Caucasian origin was the most represented (75%). Seven patients presented with hepatic comorbidities: metabolic syndrome, chronic alcoholism or chronic viral hepatitis. Apart from hepatic involvement, mediastino-pulmonary involvement was the most common followed by osteoarticular and skin. Liver damage was inaugural in two thirds of cases. Nine patients developed ascites, six presented esophageal varices complicated by gastrointestinal bleeding. Three patients presented with both ascites and variceal bleeding. One case of hepatic encephalopathy was observed. Five patients presented signs of hepatocellular insufficiency during follow-up, of whom three had hepatic comorbidities. Eight out of 12 patients required second-line treatment after failure of corticosteroids, three patients underwent ligation of esophageal varices but with recurrent digestive bleeding in all cases. Two patients benefited from a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), also with poor result. At the end of follow-up, five patients were alive and seven patients died. Two patients received a liver transplant, with good result and without recurrence of sarcoidosis on the transplant thereafter. Two patients had quiet sarcoidosis on low dose of corticosteroids and one patient was lost to follow-up.

Conclusion

Symptomatic PH related to hepatic sarcoidosis is a severe complication, with high morbidity and mortality, and frequent failure of specific treatments of PH. Early management of these patients, with detection of hepatic comorbidities seems important. In case of therapeutic failure, liver transplantation is an option to consider.

Extrapulmonary sarcoidosis primarily presenting as cholestatic liver disease

Sarcoidosis is a multisystem inflammatory disorder associated with non-caseating granulomas in affected organs, most commonly the lungs. Involvement of extrapulmonary organs is common, but lack of pulmonary involvement is rare and is called non-pulmonary sarcoidosis (NPS). Like pulmonary sarcoidosis, a definitive diagnostic test for NPS does not exist. Instead, the diagnosis of sarcoidosis requires the following elements: clinical and radiographic manifestations of sarcoidosis, histopathological detection of non-caseating granulomas and the exclusion of other diseases that may present similarly. Because of the experience with corticosteroids in pulmonary sarcoidosis, they are generally considered first-line therapy for NPS too. Ursodeoxycholic acid can be used to reduce cholestasis in NPS, but is inferior to corticosteroids in reducing inflammation. We hereby present a case that is particularly notable for its rare presentation of NPS as a granulomatous hepatitis with cholestatic liver function tests.

Autoimmune hepatitis - update on clinical management in 2017

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a progressive immune mediated liver disease of unknown origin. Key diagnostic features include hypergammaglobulinemia/elevated serum-IgG, characteristic circulating autoantibodies, periportal hepatitis with interface activity on liver biopsy and the exclusion of hepatotropic viruses. However, the diagnosis is challenging in cholestatic and severe presentations. It can be difficult to differentiate AIH from drug-induced liver injury. Although many patients initially respond to standard immunosuppressive therapy, a significant proportion experiences intolerable side effects or insufficient treatment response. This underlines the need for effective alternative treatment options, which are still very limited and based on rather poor evidence. This review summarises core aspects of the clinical management of AIH with focus on recent achievements and unmet needs.