Diagnosis and management of hepatic encephalopathy: The French recommendations

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a frequent and severe complication of liver disease with poor patient outcomes. However, it is a poorly understood complication, with no consensus for diagnosis. Therefore, HE is often underdiagnosed. Differential diagnosis may be cumbersome because of non-specific symptoms, such as confusion, cognitive disorders, the aetiological factors of cirrhosis and comorbidities, which are often observed in cirrhotic patients. Therefore, an overt or covert form of HE should be systematically investigated. Advice is provided to drive patient work-up. Effective treatments are available to prevent or treat HE bouts, but the issue of single or combination therapy has not been resolved. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement largely improved the prognosis of cirrhotic patients, but HE occurrence of HE is often a fear, even when post-TIPS HE can be avoided by a careful selection of patients and preventive treatment. HE is an indication of liver transplantation. However, its reversibility post-transplantation and the consequences of transplantation in patients with other causes of neurological disorders remain controversial, which supports the performance of an extensive work-up in expert centres for this subset of patients. The present guidelines assist clinicians in the diagnosis of the overt or covert form of HE to implement curative and preventive treatments and clarify which patients require referral to expert centres for consideration for liver transplantation. These guidelines are very clinically oriented and address different frequent clinical issues to help physicians make bedside decisions.

Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Refractory Clostridioides Difficile Infection Is Effective and Well Tolerated Even in Very Old Subjects: A Real-Life Study

OBJECTIVES

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) is an innovative therapy indicated for the treatment of recurrent Clostridioides difficile infections. Although CDI and its complications are more common in very old patients (≥80 years) due to their comorbidities, frailty and senescence of the immune system, limited data are available for this older patient population.

DESIGN

This was a single-center, real-life cohort study with retrospective outcome data registration, conducted at Toulouse, France.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Older people group was compared to the control group aged 18-79 years.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was overall survival at 52 weeks for ≥80 years patients compared to the control group after FMT. Recurrence-free survival at 52 weeks and, the occurrence of adverse events in the short and long term were the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients were included, 19 were aged ≥80 years and 39 were aged 18-79 years. Overall survival at 52 weeks after FMT of the very old patients was not different from the control group (78.9% versus 89.7%, p= 0.29). Recurrence-free survival of CDI was not different between groups, with 94.3% in the 18-79-group versus 86.9% in the ≥80 group (p=0.44). The occurrence of short- or long-term adverse events was not statistically different between the two groups (36.8% vs 41%, p=0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

FMT is effective and well-tolerated in very old frail patients. This treatment brings a rapid benefit and limits the loss of functions. It also favors their maintenance at home or in a non-medical institution dedicated to dependent subjects and improves their quality of life.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Led to a Small Increase in Changed Mentality Regarding Infection Risk without Any Change in Willingness to Be Vaccinated in Chronic Diseases Patients

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients’ perceptions regarding infection risk and vaccination in subjects suffering from chronic diseases. A prospective observational multicentric study conducted from December 2020 to April 2021 in three French University Hospitals. Patients with chronic diseases were proposed to complete a questionnaire regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on infectious risk knowledge and vaccination. A total of 1151 patients were included and analyzed (62% of which were people with diabetes). The COVID-19 pandemic increased awareness of infectious risks by 19.3%, significantly more in people with diabetes (23.2%, from 54.4% to 67.0%, p < 0.01) when compared to the other high-risk patients (12.5%, from 50.5% to 56.8%, p = 0.06). Respectively, 30.6% and 16.5% of patients not up-to-date for pneumococcal and flu vaccines reported wanting to update their vaccination due to the COVID-19 pandemic. By contrast, the proportion of patients against vaccines increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (6.0% vs. 9.5%, p < 0.01). The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a small increase in awareness regarding the risks of infection in patients with chronic diseases, including people with diabetes, but without any change in willingness to be vaccinated. This underlines the urgent need to sensibilize people with diabetes to infection risk and the importance of vaccination.

Lessons from “real life experience” of rifaximin use in the management of recurrent hepatic encephalopathy

BACKGROUND

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a major complication of cirrhosis with independent prognostic significance. The current management of HE is mainly based on lactulose. Rifaximin has been shown to decrease the risk of HE recurrence in patients with episodic forms. HE can also be persistent. However, there is no drug support recommendation for rifaximin use in this setting.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of rifaximin in the management of recurrent episodes of HE and recurrent acute exacerbations on persistent HE, in “real life conditions”.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, using a within-subjects design, we collected data of patients treated with rifaximin for HE in two liver diseases centers, during the six-month period before and during the six-month period after the initiation of rifaximin. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the total number of HE events involving hospitalization.

RESULTS

Rifaximin was introduced for prevention of recurrent HE episodes in 29 out of 62 patients with normal mental status between episodes and for prevention of recurrent acute exacerbations on persistent HE in 33 out of 62 patients. In the “prevention of recurrent HE episodes” group, fewer HE events (0.79 vs 1.78; P = 0.013) were reported during the period of time when rifaximin was used. In the “prevention of recurrent acute exacerbations on persistent HE” group, there was no significant difference in the number of HE-events (1.48 vs 1.77; P = 0.582).

CONCLUSION

In this real-life experience, the effectiveness of rifaximin was confirmed in the prevention of HE episodes recurrence but was not proved in the prevention of acute exacerbations recurrence on persistent HE.

[Proper use of antibiotics: a prospective study on the use of linezolid in a French university hospital]

AIM OF THE STUDY

To describe clinical use of a new antibiotic: linezolid, in a French university hospital, on a population of patients different from the one studied during the clinical trials for the marketing authorisation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An observational, prospective cohort study performed in patients treated by linezolid between November 2005 and June 2006 at Saint André hospital (Bordeaux University Hospital). The following data were collected: sources of infection, isolated pathogens, patient's background, antibiotherapy strategies, duration of therapy and evolution.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (intensive care, internal medicine) were included. The absence of local guidelines on proper use of linezolid led to various prescriptions as well in infections listed in the marketing authorisation: nosocomial pneumonia and ventilator associated pneumonia (48%), skin and soft tissue infections (11%), as in endocarditis (7%), intra-abdominal infections (13%), bone and joint infections (2%), catheter infections (13%) and febrile neutropenic patients (6%). The main justification for using linezolid was worsening renal dysfunction (66%), which contra indicated glycopeptides use. Isolated pathogens were for the major part staphylococcus.

CONCLUSION

In the context of proper use of antibiotics, it would be advisable to add new recommendations on the use of linezolid to the hospital's antibiotherapy guide which would constitute a tool for the prescribing clinicians, and to re-evaluate the impact during a second evaluation.