Treatment of hepatorenal syndrome

Standardized approach of albumin, midodrine and octreotide on hepatorenal syndrome treatment response rate

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) remains a serious complication of cirrhosis with a high mortality rate. There is little information on the effect of standardizing albumin, midodrine and octreotide combination on treatment response in patients with HRS.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the impact of a standardized HRS treatment regimen on renal function recovery. The primary outcome was full response rate. Secondary outcomes included partial and no response rates, 30-day all-cause mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, liver transplantation and total dose of albumin.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the impact of using a standardized approach with albumin, midodrine and octreotide on treatment response rates compared to a historical group.

RESULTS

Of the patients with HRS, 28 received a standardized approach with albumin, midodrine and octreotide while 60 received a nonstandardized approach. Ten percent of patients achieved full response in the prestandardization group compared with 25% in the poststandardization group (P = 0.07). Renal replacement therapy was significantly more prevalent in the prestandardization group vs. poststandardization group (45% vs. 21.4%, P = 0.03). Liver transplantation was performed significantly more often in the prestandardization group compared the poststandardization group (23% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.02). Amount of albumin used was statistically lower in the poststandardization group (425 vs. 332 g, P = 0.05). No significant differences in days of HRS treatment, mortality rate, hospital and ICU LOS were observed.

CONCLUSION

A trend towards improved treatment response rate was observed after standardizing the HRS treatment regimen. Standardized therapy led to significantly lower rates of renal replacement therapy and liver transplantation, suggesting patients in poststandardization were effectively managed medically without requiring further intervention.

Recovery of Native Renal Function in Patients with Hepatorenal Syndrome Following Combined Liver and Kidney Transplant with Mercaptoacetyltriglycine-3 Renogram: Developing a Methodology

Many patients with hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) end up receiving a combined liver and kidney transplant (CKLT) with preservation of native kidneys, specially type 1 HRS since is characterizes by a very rapid deterioration of renal function. Eventually, most of the patients regain renal function, but it is unknown if this is due to the transplanted kidney, the recovery of native renal function, or both. The aim of this study is to evaluate if there is recovery of native renal function in patients with HRS following CKLT. 22 patients (16 men; 6 women) with history of HRS and status post CKLT were studied. Mercapto-acetyltriglycine-3 renograms in the anterior and posterior views with the three kidneys in the field of view were simultaneously acquired. The renograms were analyzed by creating regions of interest around the transplanted and native kidneys. Relative contribution to the renal function, clearance, and effective renal plasma flow for the transplanted and native kidneys were obtained. 1/22 (4.5%) patients presented with a very poor functioning transplanted kidney, in 15/22 (68%) cases the combined native renal function was markedly poorer than the transplanted renal function and in 6/22 (27%) native kidneys showed a contribution to the renal function similar to the transplanted kidney. In conclusion, our series show that around 32% of the HRS patients recovered their native renal function after CKLT. Identification of common factors that affect recovery of native renal function may help to avoid unnecessary renal transplants, significantly reducing morbidity and cost, while facilitating a reallocation of scarce donor resources.

Hepatorenal Syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is the most serious hepatorenal disorder and one of the most difficult to treat. To date, the best treatment options are those that reverse the mechanisms underlying HRS: portal hypertension, splanchnic vasodilation, and/or renal vasoconstriction. Therefore, liver transplantation is the preferred definitive treatment option. The role of other therapies is predominantly to prolong survival sufficiently to allow patients to undergo transplantation. Terlipressin with the addition of adjunctive albumin volume expansion is the preferred pharmacologic therapy for the treatment of patients with HRS. Norepinephrine and vasopressin are acceptable alternatives in countries where terlipressin is not yet available. For patients with Type II HRS, midodrine plus octreotide appears to be an effective pharmacologic regimen that can be administered outside of an intensive care unit setting. Regardless of chosen vasoconstrictor therapy, careful monitoring is needed to ensure tissue ischemia and severe adverse effects do not occur. Artificial hepatic support devices, renal replacement therapy, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) are non-pharmacologic options for patients with HRS. However, hepatic support devices and renal replacement therapies have not yet demonstrated improved outcomes and TIPS is difficult to be employed in patients with Type I HRS due to contraindications in the majority of patients. Despite advances in our understanding of hepatorenal syndrome, the disease is still associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs. More evidence is urgently needed to help improve patient outcomes in this difficult-to-treat population.

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.

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.

Impact of hepatorenal syndrome and liver transplantation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is an extremely detrimental complication of cirrhosis, with dismal survival in untreated patients. Continued advances in understanding the pathophysiology of HRS have improved HRS recognition and facilitated development of effective treatment strategies. In this article, we review current concepts in HRS pathophysiology, guidelines for HRS diagnosis, effective treatment options presently available, and controversies surrounding liver versus liver-kidney transplant in transplant candidates.

RECENT FINDINGS

Published diagnostic criteria for HRS have improved early recognition and intervention in HRS. Increasing data support vasoconstrictor therapy for HRS reversal. Several randomized controlled trials clearly demonstrate efficacy of terlipressin therapy in HRS reversal; although comparable studies are lacking with norepinephrine, preliminary findings suggest that this regime may be the preferred alternative when terlipressin is unavailable for use. In transplant candidates without response to vasoconstrictor therapies, mounting evidence supports simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation if prolonged pretransplant dialysis is required.

SUMMARY

Prompt identification and therapy initiation in transplant candidates with HRS may improve transplantation rates and posttransplantation outcomes. Future studies identifying optimal vasoconstrictor regimens, alternative therapies, and factors predictive of response to therapy are needed. The appropriate use of simultaneous liver-kidney transplants in patients with HRS remains controversial and requires further analysis by the transplant community.

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.

Terlipressin in hepatorenal syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To compare the pharmacology, dosing, and adverse reactions of vasopressin and terlipressin for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and assess the efficacy of the investigational drug terlipressin for HRS.

DATA SOURCES

Articles evaluating prospective studies for vasopressin and terlipressin were discussed after being identified through PubMed (1966-November 2010), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-November 2010), and EMBASE (1985-November 2010) with combinations of the following terms: vasopressin, terlipressin, and hepatorenal syndrome. In addition, reference citations from publications identified were reviewed. Thirteen studies were identified for terlipressin, along with 4 meta-analyses and 1 case report. For vasopressin, 2 studies were identified.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Prospective clinical studies directly comparing terlipressin and vasopressin were evaluated, as well as prospective clinical studies and meta-analyses for terlipressin in HRS.

DATA SYNTHESIS

No randomized, placebo-controlled trials using vasopressin for the treatment of type I HRS have been published, and 4 randomized studies involving 197 patients provide the most current outcome data for use of terlipressin in HRS. Terlipressin differs significantly from vasopressin with regard to its pharmacology, dosing, and adverse drug reaction profile. There is a paucity of data on vasopressin for HRS.

CONCLUSIONS

No definitive recommendations can be made for the use of terlipressin for this indication until further, well-conducted studies are performed.

Renal and circulatory dysfunction in cirrhosis: current management and future perspectives

Chronic liver diseases are amongst the top leading causes of death in Europe as well as in other areas of the world. Chronic liver diseases are characterized by unrelenting progression of liver inflammation and fibrosis over a prolonged period of time, usually more than 20 years, which may eventually lead to cirrhosis. Advanced cirrhosis leads to a complex syndrome of chronic liver failure which involves many different organs besides the liver, including the brain, heart and systemic circulation, adrenal glands, lungs, and kidneys. The high morbidity and mortality secondary to chronic liver failure is due to complications related to the dysfunction of these organs, either alone or, more frequently, in combination. Understanding the mechanisms leading to organ dysfunction is crucial to the development of strategies for treatment and prevention of complications of cirrhosis. This article reviews our current knowledge, as well as future perspectives, on the management of circulatory and renal dysfunction in chronic liver failure.

Renal failure in patients with cirrhosis: hepatorenal syndrome and renal support strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The development of hepatorenal syndrome in liver cirrhosis leads to an increased morbidity and mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Currently, there are no proven methods for the treatment or prevention of hepatorenal syndrome except to maintain adequate hemodynamics and intravascular volume in this patient population. These patients will frequently require renal replacement therapy when presenting for hepatic transplantation.

RECENT FINDINGS

New consensus definitions have been published in order to create uniform standards for classifying and diagnosing acute kidney injury. Two such groups are the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) and the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN), which have proposed approaches to defining criteria for acute kidney injury. Recent literature supports not only the role of splanchnic vasodilation and systemic vasoconstriction but also heart failure in the pathogenesis of hepatorenal syndrome. The practice of using vasoconstrictor and intravenous albumin therapy for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome is ongoing with a growing body of recent data supporting the use of vasopressin analogs as the first-line therapy in the ICU setting with knowledge of the possible cardiovascular side-effects.

SUMMARY

Hepatorenal syndrome, HRS, is a diagnosis of exclusion. There are two forms of hepatorenal syndrome: type 1 hepatorenal syndrome and type 2 hepatorenal syndrome. Type 1 HRS is rapidly progressive and portends a very poor prognosis and has a high mortality rate. Type 2 is more indolent while still associated with an overall poor prognosis. Treatment of HRS is largely still supportive. It is imperative to maintain euvolemia and hemodynamics in this patient population to optimize renal perfusion and preserve renal function. Renal replacement therapy may be necessary in this chronically ill patient population, if renal function deteriorates such that the kidneys cannot maintain metabolic and volume homeostasis. Further research is still necessary as to the prevention and effective treatment for hepatorenal syndrome.