Carvedilol reduces the risk of decompensation and mortality in patients with compensated cirrhosis in a competing-risk meta-analysis

Carvedilol Plus NUC for Patients With HBV-Compensated Cirrhosis Under Virological Suppression: A Randomized Open-Label Trial

INTRODUCTION

Portal hypertension progression can be relieved after controlling the etiology of liver cirrhosis. Whether beta-blockers could additionally enhance the effects during treatment, particularly for small esophageal varices (EV), was unclear. This study aims to assess the efficacy of add-on carvedilol to delay EV progression during anti-hepatitis B virus (HBV) treatment in HBV-related cirrhosis.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with virologically suppressed HBV-compensated cirrhosis and small/medium EV. The participants were randomly assigned to receive nucleos(t)ide analog (NUC) or carvedilol 12.5 mg plus NUC (1:1 allocation ratio). The primary end point was the progression rate of EV at 2 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 238 patients (small EV, 77.3%) were randomized into 119 NUC and 119 carvedilol plus NUC (carvedilol [CARV] combination group). Among them, 205 patients (86.1%) completed paired endoscopies. EV progression rate was 15.5% (16/103) in the NUC group and 12.7% (13/102) in the CARV combination group (relative risk = 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.36-1.75, P = 0.567). Subgroup analysis on medium EV showed the CARV combination group had a more favorable effect in promoting EV regression (43.5% vs 13.1%, P = 0.022) than NUC alone, but not in small cases ( P = 0.534). The incidence of liver-related events (decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma, or death/liver transplantation) within 2 years was similar between the 2 groups (11.2% vs 10.4%, P = 0.881).

DISCUSSION

The overall results did not show statistically significant differences between the added carvedilol strategy and NUC monotherapy in preventing EV progression in patients with virologically suppressed HBV-compensated cirrhosis. However, the carvedilol-added approach might offer improved outcomes specifically for patients with medium EV (NCT03736265).

Beta-blockers and cirrhosis: Striking the right balance

Decompensated cirrhosis is associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality. Variceal hemorrhage (VH) further increases the risk of mortality, and of future variceal bleed events. Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) are effective therapy for primary and secondary prophylaxis of VH and have become the cornerstone of pharmacologic therapy in cirrhosis. Beta-blockers are associated with reduced overall mortality and GI-bleeding related mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis; they may also confer hemodynamically independent beneficial effects. Long-term treatment with beta-blockers may improve decompensation-free survival in compensated cirrhosis with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). Carvedilol more effectively lowers the hepatic vein portal gradient than traditional NSBBs and has been shown to improve survival in compensated cirrhosis. Treatment goals in compensated cirrhosis with CSPH should focus on early utilization of beta-blockers to prevent decompensation and reduce mortality.

Endoscopic variceal ligation versus propranolol for the primary prevention of oesophageal variceal bleeding in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: an open-label, two-centre, randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This randomised trial aimed to address whether endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) or propranolol (PPL) is more effective at preventing initial oesophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

DESIGN

Patients with HCC and medium-to-large oesophageal varices (EVs) but without previous EVB were randomised to receive EVL (every 3-4 weeks until variceal eradication) or PPL (up to 320 mg daily) at a 1:1 ratio. Long-term follow-up data on EVB, other upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), non-bleeding liver decompensation, overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AEs) were analysed using competing risk regression.

RESULTS

Between June 2011 and April 2021, 144 patients were randomised to receive EVL (n=72) or PPL (n=72). In the EVL group, 7 patients experienced EVB, and 30 died; in the PPL group, 19 patients had EVB, and 40 died. The EVL group had a lower cumulative incidence of EVB (Gray's test, p=0.009) than its counterpart, with no mortality difference (Gray's test, p=0.085). For patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage A/B, EVL was better than PPL in reducing EVB (p<0.001) and mortality (p=0.003). For patients beyond BCLC stage B, between-group outcomes were similar. Other UGIB, non-bleeding liver decompensation and AEs did not differ between groups. A competing risk regression model confirmed the prognostic value of EVL.

CONCLUSION

EVL is superior to PPL in preventing initial EVB in patients with HCC. The benefits of EVL on EVB and OS may be limited to patients with BCLC stage A/B and not to those with BCLC stage C/D.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01970748.

Recent developments in the management of ascites in cirrhosis

In recent years, advances have been made for treating ascites in patients with cirrhosis. Recent studies have indicated that several treatments that have been used for a long time in the management of portal hypertension may have beneficial effects that were not previously identified. Long-term albumin infusion may improve survival in patients with cirrhosis and ascites while beta-blockers may reduce ascites occurrence. Transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt (TIPS) placement may also improve survival in selected patients in addition to the control with ascites. Low-flow ascites pump insertion can be another option for some patients with intractable ascites. In this review, we summarize the latest data related to the management of ascites occurring in cirrhosis. There are still unanswered questions, such as the optimal use of albumin as a long-term therapy, the place of beta-blockers, and the best timing for TIPS placement to improve the natural history of ascites, as well as the optimal stent diameter to reduce the risk of shunt-related side-effects. These issued should be addressed in future studies.

Improving primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding by adapting therapy to the clinical stage of cirrhosis. A competing-risk meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) and endoscopic variceal-ligation (EVL) have similar efficacy preventing first variceal bleeding. Compensated and decompensated cirrhosis are markedly different stages, which may impact treatment outcomes. We aimed to assess the efficacy of NSBBs vs EVL on survival in patients with high-risk varices without previous bleeding, stratifying risk according to compensated/decompensated stage of cirrhosis.

METHODS

By systematic review, we identified RCTs comparing NSBBs vs EVL, in monotherapy or combined, for primary bleeding prevention. We performed a competing-risk, time-to-event meta-analysis, using individual patient data (IPD) obtained from principal investigators of RCTs. Analyses were stratified according to previous decompensation of cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Of 25 RCTs eligible, 14 failed to provide IPD and 11 were included, comprising 1400 patients (656 compensated, 744 decompensated), treated with NSBBs (N = 625), EVL (N = 546) or NSBB+EVL (N = 229). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Overall, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs (subdistribution hazard-ratio (sHR) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.75-1.49) and with EVL + NSBBs vs either monotherapy, with low heterogeneity (I2  = 28.7%). In compensated patients, mortality risk was higher with EVL vs NSBBs (sHR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.11-2.77) and not significantly lower with NSBBs+EVL vs NSBBs, without heterogeneity (I2  = 0%). In decompensated patients, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs and with NSBBs+EVL vs. either monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with compensated cirrhosis and high-risk varices on primary prophylaxis, NSBBs significantly improved survival vs EVL, with no additional benefit noted adding EVL to NSBBs. In decompensated patients, survival was similar with both therapies. The study suggests that NSBBs are preferable when advising preventive therapy in compensated patients.

Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Liver Transplant Setting

Liver transplantation is currently the only curative therapy for patients with liver cirrhosis. Not all patients in the natural course of the disease will undergo transplantation, but the majority of them will experience portal hypertension and its complications. In addition to medical and endoscopic therapy, a key role in managing these complications is played by the placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Some indications for TIPS placement are well-established, and they are expanding and broadening over time. This review aims to describe the role of TIPS in managing patients with liver cirrhosis, in light of liver transplantation. As far as it is known, TIPS placement seems not to affect the surgical aspects of liver transplantation, in terms of intraoperative bleeding rates, postoperative complications, or length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit. However, the placement of a TIPS "towards transplant" can offer advantages in terms of ameliorating a patient's clinical condition at the time of transplantation and improving patient survival. Additionally, the TIPS procedure can help preserve the technical feasibility of the transplant itself. In this context, indications for TIPS placement at an earlier stage are drawing particular attention. However, TIPS insertion in decompensated patients can also lead to serious adverse events. For these reasons, further studies are needed to make reliable recommendations for TIPS in the pre-transplant setting.

Portal hypertension and variceal bleeding in patients with liver cancer: Evidence gaps for prevention and management

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Portal hypertension (PHT) and HCC are 2 major complications of cirrhosis that often coexist in the same patient and impact the prognosis, especially in patients with acute variceal bleeding. In this review, we aim to discuss the best strategy for PHT screening and primary prophylaxis, as well as the management of acute variceal bleeding, to improve the management of PHT in HCC patients.

RESULTS

Recent therapeutic advances observed in the management of HCC, notably through the advent of immunotherapy, have led to a clear improvement in the survival of patients. The prevention of complications related to underlying cirrhosis, such as PHT and acute variceal bleeding, is now part of the management of HCC patients. The Baveno VII conference recently redefined screening and prophylaxis in patients with cirrhosis. However, data regarding the applicability of these criteria in patients with HCC have been sparse. From our point of view, the Baveno criteria are not appropriate to exclude high-risk esophageal varices (EV) in HCC patients, and endoscopy should be performed except in HCC patients with a liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≥25 kPa, who should benefit from nonselective beta-blockers (NSSBs) without performing endoscopy. We are also in favor of using NSBBs as primary prophylaxis in patients with EV regardless of the size and with gastric varices since these patients display clinically significant PHT.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate evaluation and treatment of PHT remain major issues in improving the outcomes of HCC patients. Many questions remain unanswered, opening the field to many areas of research.

Evolving portal hypertension through Baveno VII recommendations

The Baveno VII consensus workshop has provided several novel recommendations regarding the management of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). The expert panel summarized the existing data into simple clinical rules to aid clinicians in their clinical practice. The use of non-invasive tests (NITs), especially liver stiffness measurement (LSM), have gain an important role in daily practice. The use of LSM alone or in combination with platelet count can be used to rule-in and rule-out compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD) and CSPH. Further decompensation events were defined as a prognostic stage associated with an even higher mortality than that associated with first decompensation. Moreover, the term hepatic recompensation was introduced in Baveno VII consensus implying a partial or complete regression of the functional and structural changes of cirrhosis after the removal of the underlying etiology. This review will summarize the reader main aspects of Baveno VII consensus regarding the use of NITs in cACLD, analyze further decompensation events, and evaluate recent recommendations for prophylaxis and management of liver decompensation events.

Endoscopic procedures in hepatology: Current trends and new developments

Gastrointestinal endoscopy has long been a reliable backbone in the diagnosis and management of hepatobilary disorders and their complications. However, with evolving non-invasive testing, personalised medicine has reframed the utility and necessity of endoscopic screening. Conversely, the growing interest and use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and advanced endoscopy within gastrointestinal units has also opened novel diagnostic and therapeutic avenues for patients with various hepatobiliary diseases. The integration of "advanced endoscopy" within the practice of hepatology is nowadays referred to as "endo-hepatology". In essence, endo-hepatology consists of two pillars: one focusing primarily on disorders of the liver parenchyma, vascular disorders, and portal hypertension, which is mainly captured via EUS, while the other targets the hepatobiliary tract via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and advanced imaging. Applications under the umbrella of endo-hepatology include, amongst others, EUS-guided liver biopsy, EUS-guided portal pressure gradient measurement, coil and glue embolisation of gastric varices as well as cholangioscopy. As such endo-hepatology could become an attractive concept wherein advanced endoscopy might reinforce the medical management of patients with hepatobiliary disorders and their complications after initial basic work-up. In this review, we discuss current trends and future developments within endo-hepatology and the remaining hurdles to overcome.

CURRENT PHARMACOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT IN UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common reason for presentation to the hospital. Appropriate resuscitation followed by endoscopic assessment and endotherapy for high-risk lesions (active bleeding or non-bleeding with visible vessels) forms the cornerstone of management. Pharmacological therapies are utilised at each stage of management in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding. Proton pump inhibitors and prokinetic agents can be administered pre-endoscopically with vasoactive medication and antibiotics utilised in suspected variceal bleeding. Epinephrine may be used as a temporising measure to improve visualisation during endoscopy but should not applied as a single agent. Topical endoscopic therapies have also shown promise in achieving haemostasis. Following endoscopy, a high dose of proton pump inhibitor should be given to patients who require endotherapy and vasoactive medications, and antibiotics continued in confirmed variceal bleeds. The timing of resumption of antithrombotic medication is dependent on the agent utilised and underlying thrombotic risk.

A rapid, non-invasive, clinical surveillance for CachExia, sarcopenia, portal hypertension, and hepatocellular carcinoma in end-stage liver disease: the ACCESS-ESLD study protocol

BACKGROUND

Liver cirrhosis, the advanced stage of many chronic liver diseases, is associated with escalated risks of liver-related complications like decompensation and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Morbidity and mortality in cirrhosis patients are linked to portal hypertension, sarcopenia, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Although conventional cirrhosis management centered on treating complications, contemporary approaches prioritize preemptive measures. This study aims to formulate novel blood- and imaging-centric methodologies for monitoring liver cirrhosis patients.

METHODS

In this prospective study, 150 liver cirrhosis patients will be enrolled from three Swedish liver clinics. Their conditions will be assessed through extensive blood-based markers and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The MRI protocol encompasses body composition profile with Muscle Assement Score, portal flow assessment, magnet resonance elastography, and a abbreviated MRI for HCC screening. Evaluation of lifestyle, muscular strength, physical performance, body composition, and quality of life will be conducted. Additionally, DNA, serum, and plasma biobanking will facilitate future investigations.

DISCUSSION

The anticipated outcomes involve the identification and validation of non-invasive blood- and imaging-oriented biomarkers, enhancing the care paradigm for liver cirrhosis patients. Notably, the temporal evolution of these biomarkers will be crucial for understanding dynamic changes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, registration identifier NCT05502198. Registered on 16 August 2022. Link: https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT05502198 .

Liver ischemia-reperfusion injury: From trigger loading to shot firing

An ischemia-reperfusion injury (IRI) results from a prolonged ischemic insult followed by the restoration of blood perfusion, being a common cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in liver transplantation. At the maximum of the potential damage, IRI is characterized by 2 main phases. The first is the ischemic phase, where the hypoxia and vascular stasis induces cell damage and the accumulation of damage-associated molecular patterns and cytokines. The second is the reperfusion phase, where the local sterile inflammatory response driven by innate immunity leads to a massive cell death and impaired liver functionality. The ischemic time becomes crucial in patients with underlying pathophysiological conditions. It is possible to compare this process to a shooting gun, where the loading trigger is the ischemia period and the firing shot is the reperfusion phase. In this optic, this article aims at reviewing the main ischemic events following the phases of the surgical timeline, considering the consequent reperfusion damage.

THE ROLE OF ELASTOGRAPHY IN CLINICALLY SIGNIFICANT PORTAL HYPERTENSION

• In compensated cirrhosis, using non-invasive methods would exempt the patient from the need of an endoscopy. • The Baveno VII presented the "rule of 5" for Vibration-Controlled Transient Elastography; liver stiffness measurement ≤15 kPa and platelets >150.000/mm3 exclude clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH), while when ≥25 kPa is highly suggestive of CSPH. • Spleen stiffness measurement has been proposed as a more specific technique to predict the presence of CSPH. • Elastography has gained prestige in the non-invasive evaluation of patients with advanced chronic liver disease by allowing prophylactic measures to be taken when suggesting the presence of CSPH. This is a narrative review that aims to discuss the importance of elastographic methods in the evaluation of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) in cirrhotic patients, where the authors propose an algorithm for evaluating these patients. In compensated advanced chronic liver disease, the goal is to prevent the development of CSPH and, in those already with CSPH, prevent the appearance of gastroesophageal varices (GEV) and other complications of portal hypertension. In compensated cirrhosis, the prevalence of GEV is 30-40%, of which 10-20% are at risk of bleeding. Therefore, using non-invasive methods would exempt the patient from the need of an endoscopy. Hepatic Elastography is a non-invasive, safe, reproducible method, available through many techniques: Vibration-Controlled Transient Elastography (VCTE), Shear Wave Elastography (SWE) and Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE). The Baveno VII presented the "rule of 5" for VCTE: liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≤15 kPa and platelets >150.000/mm3 exclude CSPH, while an LSM ≥25 kPa is highly suggestive of CSPH. Also, the "rule of 4" for SWE has been proposed: patients with ≥17 kPa could be considered as having CSPH. At last, spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) has been proposed as a more specific technique to predict the presence of CSPH. In conclusion, elastography has gained prestige in the non-invasive evaluation of patients with advanced chronic liver disease by allowing prophylactic measures to be taken when suggesting the presence of CSPH.

Nonselective beta-blockers may lead to stage 2 acute kidney injury and waitlist mortality in child class C cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) protect patients with compensated cirrhosis; however, it is unclear if NSBB is associated with acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. We aimed to determine if the use of NSBB was associated with an increased risk of stage II AKI or greater and waitlist mortality (WLM) among patients with decompensated cirrhosis awaiting liver transplant stratified by cirrhosis severity.

METHODS

Included were 1816 outpatients listed for liver transplantation at UCSF from June 2012 to April 2022. Our primary outcome was stage 2 AKI (>200% increase in serum creatinine). Our secondary outcome was WLM (all-cause mortality). Our primary exposure was the use of any NSBB derived using natural language processing of clinical notes. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models with time-dependent variables were used to determine the HR of NSBB use on stage 2 AKI and WLM, stratified by Child-Pugh Score.

RESULTS

The average age of the cohort was 58 years old, with 35% identifying as female. In multivariable time-dependent models, NSBB use was associated with 1.53 × (95 CI 1.19-1.97) the hazard of stage 2 AKI in the cohort overall and 1.80 × (95 CI 1.26-2.57) among those with Child C cirrhosis, respectively. Similarly, NSBB use was associated with 1.30 × (95 CI 1.07-1.59) and 1.45 × (95 CI 1.03-2.03) the hazard of WLM, overall and in Child C, respectively. NSBB use was not significantly associated with AKI nor WLM among those with Child A.

CONCLUSION

NSBB use is associated with Stage 2 AKI and WLM in patients awaiting liver transplantation and Child C cirrhosis. These data suggest cautious use of NSBBs in patients in this population.

Compensated liver cirrhosis: Natural course and disease-modifying strategies

Compensated liver cirrhosis (CLC) is defined as cirrhosis with one or more decompensating events, such as ascites, variceal haemorrhage, or hepatic encephalopathy. Patients with CLC are largely asymptomatic with preserved hepatic function. The transition from CLC to decompensated cirrhosis occurs as a result of a complex interaction between multiple predisposing and precipitating factors. The first decompensation event in CLC patients is considered a significant turning point in the progression of cirrhosis, as it signals a drastic decline in median survival rates from 10-12 years to only 1-2 years. Furthermore, early cirrhosis has the potential to regress as liver fibrosis is a dynamic condition. With the advent of effective non-invasive tools for detecting hepatic fibrosis, more and more patients with CLC are currently being recognised. This offers clinicians a unique opportunity to properly manage such patients in order to achieve cirrhosis regression or, at the very least, prevent its progression. There are numerous emerging approaches for preventing or delaying decompensation in CLC patients. A growing body of evidence indicates that treating the underlying cause can lead to cirrhosis regression, and the use of non-selective beta-blockers can prevent decompensation by lowering portal hypertension. Additionally, addressing various cofactors (such as obesity, diabetes, dyslipidaemia, and alcoholism) and precipitating factors (such as infection, viral hepatitis, and hepatotoxic drugs) that have a detrimental impact on the natural course of cirrhosis may benefit patients with CLC. However, high-quality data must be generated through well-designed and adequately powered randomised clinical trials to validate these disease-modifying techniques for CLC patients. This article discussed the natural history of CLC, risk factors for its progression, and therapeutic approaches that could alter the trajectory of CLC evolution and improve outcomes.

TIPS prevents further decompensation and improves survival in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension in an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Further decompensation represents a prognostic stage of cirrhosis associated with higher mortality compared with first decompensation. A transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is indicated to prevent variceal rebleeding and for refractory ascites, but its overall efficacy to prevent further decompensations is unknown. This study assessed the incidence of further decompensation and mortality after TIPS vs. standard of care (SOC).

METHODS

Controlled studies assessing covered TIPS compared with SOC for the indication of refractory ascites and prevention of variceal rebleeding published from 2004 to 2020 were considered. We collected individual patient data (IPD) to perform an IPD meta-analysis and to compare the treatment effect in a propensity score (PS)-matched population. Primary outcome was the incidence of further decompensation and the secondary outcome was overall survival.

RESULTS

In total, 3,949 individual patient data sets were extracted from 12 controlled studies and, after PS matching, 2,338 patients with similar characteristics (SOC = 1,749; TIPS = 589) were analysed. The 2-year cumulative incidence function of further decompensation in the PS-matched population was 0.48 (95% CI 0.43-0.52) in the TIPS group vs. 0.63 (95% CI 0.61-0.65) in the SOC group (stratified Gray's test, p <0.0001), considering mortality and liver transplantation as competing events. The lower further decompensation rate with TIPS was confirmed by adjusted IPD meta-analysis (hazard ratio 0.44; 95% CI 0.37-0.54) and was consistent across TIPS indication subgroups. The 2-year cumulative survival probability was higher with TIPS than with SOC (0.71 vs. 0.63; p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of TIPS for refractory ascites and for prevention of variceal rebleeding reduces the incidence of a further decompensation event compared with SOC and increases survival in highly selected patients.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

A further decompensation (new or worsening ascites, variceal bleeding or rebleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, jaundice, hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis) in patients with cirrhosis is associated with a poor prognosis. Besides the known role of TIPS in portal hypertension-related complications, this study shows that TIPS is also able to decrease the overall risk of a further decompensation and increase survival compared with standard of care. These results further support the role of TIPS in the management of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension-related complications.

Accuracy of spleen stiffness measurement for the diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension is crucial for prognosis and treatment guidance in patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD). Spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) might improve the non-invasive diagnosis of clinically significant portal hypertension, but previous studies have reported heterogeneous SSM cutoffs. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of SSM and SSM-based algorithms in this setting.

METHODS

In this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to Dec 31, 2022, for articles, abstracts, and letters, with no restrictions on language. Cross-sectional studies reporting hepatic venous pressure gradient and SSM by different techniques (transient elastography; two-dimensional shear-wave elastography [2D-SWE]; point shear-wave elastography [p-SWE]) in adults (≥18 years) with compensated ACLD were eligible for inclusion. The main outcome was the diagnostic performance of two SSM-based algorithms, with the Baveno VII model as a reference, evaluating sensitivity and specificity, as well as summary negative predictive values (NPVs) and positive predictive values (PPVs). In the Baveno VII model, clinically significant portal hypertension was ruled out if patients had a liver stiffness measurement (LSM) of 15 kPa or less and a platelet count of 150 × 109 platelets per L or higher and ruled in if they had an LSM of greater than 25 kPa. The two SSM-based models combined these same cutoffs with additional criteria. In the Baveno VII-SSM single cutoff model, clinically significant portal hypertension was ruled out if at least two of the following were present: LSM of 15 kPa or less, platelet count of 150 × 109 platelets per L or higher, and SSM of 40 kPa or less; and ruled in if at least two were present: LSM of greater than 25 kPa, platelet count of less than 150 × 109 platelets per L, and SSM of greater than 40 kPa. The Baveno VII-SSM dual cutoff model used the same criteria, but with a cutoff of SSM of less than 21 kPa to rule out, and greater than 50 kPa to rule in, clinically significant portal hypertension. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019127164.

FINDINGS

Of the 44 records assessed for eligibility, 17 studies (with 1245 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. In the transient elastography cohort (n=600), the Baveno VII algorithm was validated for both ruling out (NPV 100%, 95% CI 64-100; sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 70-100) and ruling in (PPV 95%, 85-98; specificity 94%, 95% CI 87-97) clinically significant portal hypertension, but the proportion of patients with indeterminate results (grey zone) was 48% (95% CI 44-52); 57% (95% CI 52-62) of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were included in the rule-in zone. The Baveno VII-SSM dual cutoff model had adequate NPV (98%, 95% CI 58-100; sensitivity 100%, 95% CI 91-100) and PPV (93%, 95% CI 84-97; specificity 89%, 95% CI 84-93), with 32% (95% CI 28-36) of patients in the grey zone; 76% (95% CI 72-80) of the patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were in the rule-in zone. The Baveno VII-SSM single cutoff model had a sensitivity of 93% (95% CI 85-97) and a NPV of 85% (95% CI 60-96) for ruling out, and a specificity of 86% (95% CI 80-91) and a PPV of 92% (95% CI 83-95) for ruling in, clinically significant portal hypertension. 88% (95% CI 84-91) of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were included in the rule-in zone and 9% (95% CI 7-12) of patients were in the grey zone. In the 2D-SWE cohort (n=225), all three algorithms could safely rule in clinically significant portal hypertension with adequate PPV (≥90%), but NPV was inadequate for ruling out clinically significant portal hypertension. Insufficient data were available to evaluate the performance of SSM assessed by p-SWE. Heterogeneity was low (I2<25%) for most estimates.

INTERPRETATION

Algorithms combining Baveno VII criteria with SSM showed good performance and reduced the diagnostic grey zone for clinically significant portal hypertension compared with Baveno VII criteria alone. Future studies should evaluate whether SSM-based diagnosis allows for the identification of patients who would benefit from non-selective β-blocker treatment.

FUNDING

None.

Baveno VI and VII criteria are not suitable for screening for large varices or clinically significant portal hypertension in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Baveno VI and VII criteria are used in patients with cirrhosis to rule out large size oesophageal varices (EV) and rule in/out clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH).

AIM

To evaluate their diagnostic performance in these patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively included all patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis and HCC who had endoscopy, liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and platelet count within 6 months. They were classified according to the BCLC stage. Favourable Baveno VI criteria were defined by LSM < 20 kPa and platelets > 150 G/L (to rule out large EV), favourable Baveno VII criteria if LSM ≤ 15 kPa and platelets ≥ 150 G/L (to rule out CSPH, which was defined by a HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg.

RESULTS

We included 185 patients; 46% were BCLC-0/A, 28% BCLC-B and 26% BCLC-C. EV were present in 44% (23% large), and HVPG ≥ 10 mm Hg in 42% (mean 8 mm Hg). In patients with favourable Baveno VI criteria, 8% of the whole cohort (Se 93%, NPV 92%), 11% of BCLC-0-A (Se 89%, NPV 89%) and 10.0% of BCLC-C patients (Se 91%, NPV 90%) had large EV. Among patients with HVPG < 10 mm Hg, 6% had large EV and 17% small. CSPH was present in 23% of patients with favourable Baveno VII criteria among the whole cohort, and in 25% of those with BCLC-0/A. The specificity of LSM ≥ 25 kPa to rule in CSPH was 48%.

CONCLUSIONS

Favourable Baveno VI criteria are not appropriate to rule out the presence of high-risk EV, or Baveno VII criteria to rule CSPH in/out in patients with HCC.

Quantifying the benefit of nonselective beta-blockers in the prevention of hepatic decompensation: A Bayesian reanalysis of the PREDESCI trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Beta-blockers have been studied for the prevention of variceal bleeding and, more recently, for the prevention of all-cause decompensation. Some uncertainties regarding the benefit of beta-blockers for the prevention of decompensation remain. Bayesian analyses enhance the interpretation of trials. The purpose of this study was to provide clinically meaningful estimates of both the probability and magnitude of the benefit of beta-blocker treatment across a range of patient types.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

We undertook a Bayesian reanalysis of PREDESCI incorporating 3 priors (moderate neutral, moderate optimistic, and weak pessimistic). The probability of clinical benefit was assessed considering the prevention of all-cause decompensation. Microsimulation analyses were done to determine the magnitude of the benefit. In the Bayesian analysis, the probability that beta-blockers reduce all-cause decompensation was >0.93 for all priors. The Bayesian posterior hazard ratios (HR) for decompensation ranged from 0.50 (optimistic prior, 95% credible interval 0.27-0.93) to 0.70 (neutral prior, 95% credible interval 0.44-1.12). Exploring the benefit of treatment using microsimulation highlights substantial treatment benefits. For the neutral prior derived posterior HR and a 5% annual incidence of decompensation, at 10 years, an average of 497 decompensation-free years per 1000 patients were gained with treatment. In contrast, at 10 years 1639 years per 1000 patients were gained from the optimistic prior derived posterior HR and a 10% incidence of decompensation.

CONCLUSIONS

Beta-blocker treatment is associated with a high probability of clinical benefit. This likely translates to a substantial gain in decompensation-free life years at the population level.

British Society of Gastroenterology Best Practice Guidance: outpatient management of cirrhosis - part 1: compensated cirrhosis

The prevalence of cirrhosis has risen significantly over recent decades and is predicted to rise further. Widespread use of non-invasive testing means cirrhosis is increasingly diagnosed at an earlier stage. Despite this, there are significant variations in outcomes in patients with cirrhosis across the UK, and patients in areas with higher levels of deprivation are more likely to die from their liver disease. This three-part best practice guidance aims to address outpatient management of cirrhosis, in order to standardise care and to reduce the risk of progression, decompensation and mortality from liver disease. Here, in part one, we focus on outpatient management of compensated cirrhosis, encompassing hepatocellular cancer surveillance, screening for varices and osteoporosis, vaccination and lifestyle measures. We also introduce a compensated cirrhosis care bundle for use in the outpatient setting. Part two concentrates on outpatient management of decompensated disease including management of ascites, encephalopathy, varices, nutrition as well as liver transplantation and palliative care. The third part of the guidance covers special circumstances encountered in managing people with cirrhosis: surgery, pregnancy, travel, managing bleeding risk for invasive procedures and portal vein thrombosis.

Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient Predicts Further Decompensation in Cirrhosis Patients with Acute Esophageal Variceal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

The role of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in predicting further decompensation in cirrhosis patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is not known. We aimed to evaluate the role of HVPG in predicting further decompensation in cirrhosis patients with AVB Methods: In this prospective study, 145 patients with cirrhosis with esophageal or gastric AVB were included. HVPG was measured on the day of the AVB. Decompensating events occurring after 42-days of AVB were considered further decompensation.

RESULTS

The median age of the study cohort was 44 years; 88.3% males. The predominant etiology of cirrhosis was alcohol (46.2%). Overall, 40 (27.6%) patients developed further decompensation during median follow-up of 296 days following AVB. Gastro intestinal bleeding n = 27 (18.6%) and new-onset/worsening ascites n = 20 (13.8%) were the most common decompensating events. According to the multivariate model, HVPG was an independent predictor of any further decompensation in esophageal AVB patients but not in gastric variceal bleeding patients. HVPG cut-off of ≥16 mmHg predicted further decompensation in the esophageal AVB. However, HVPG was not an independent predictor of mortality.

CONCLUSION

HVPG measured during an episode of acute variceal hemorrhage from esophageal varices predicts further decompensating events in cirrhosis patients.

Innovative approaches to the management of ascites in cirrhosis

Standard of care for the treatment of ascites in cirrhosis is to administer a sodium-restricted diet and diuretic therapy. The progression of cirrhosis will eventually lead to the development of refractory ascites, at which point diuretics will no longer be able to control the ascites. Second-line therapies such as a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement or repeat large volume paracentesis are then required. There is some evidence that regular infusions of albumin may delay the onset of refractoriness and improve survival, especially if given at an early stage in the natural history of ascites and for a long enough duration. The use of TIPS can eliminate ascites, but its insertion is associated with complications, especially cardiac decompensation and worsening of hepatic encephalopathy. New information is now available regarding how to best select patients for TIPS, what type of cardiac investigations are needed and how under-dilating the TIPS at the time of insertion may help. The use of a non-absorbable antibiotics, such as rifaximin, starting in the pre-TIPS period may also reduce the likelihood of post-TIPS hepatic encephalopathy. In patients who are not suitable for TIPS, the use of an alfapump to remove the ascites via the bladder can improve quality of life without significantly altering survival. In the future it may be possible to use metabolomics to help refine the management of patients with ascites, e.g. to assess their response to non-selective beta-blockers or to predict the development of other complications such as acute kidney injury.

Non-Selective Beta-Blockers and Risk of Sepsis in Patients with Cirrhosis and Ascites: Results from a Large Observational Study

Background and Aims

Previous studies have not been able to determine whether non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) reduce the risk of sepsis in cirrhosis. We aimed to examine this question with data from 1198 patients with cirrhosis and ascites included in clinical studies of satavaptan, a vasopressin receptor antagonist with no effect on infection risk.

Methods

Risk of sepsis was estimated for NSBB users vs nonusers. Patients were examined every four weeks, or in relation to hospitalization, for the one-year duration of the trials. We computed the cumulative risk of sepsis for patients who did vs did not use NSBB at baseline. We used Cox regression to compare hazard rates of sepsis between current users and nonusers, accounting for changes in NSBB use over time. We adjusted for patient sex and age, MELD-Na score, albumin, use of antibiotics, use of proton pump inhibitors, cirrhosis etiology, history of variceal bleeding or SBP, severity of ascites and HE, HCC, other cancers, and diabetes, while stratifying on geographical region.

Results

Of the 1198 patients, 54% used NSBB at some time. There were 56 sepsis episodes. The 1-year risk of sepsis was reduced to 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.8-8.6) in baseline NSBB users vs 11.6% (95% CI 7.0-15.9) in baseline nonusers. The hazard ratio of sepsis for current NSBB users vs current nonusers was reduced to 0.5 (95% CI 0.3-0.8) and after adjustment to 0.7 (95% CI 0.4-1.3).

Conclusion

NSBB use may reduce the risk of sepsis in patients with cirrhosis and ascites, but the precision of the estimate was limited by the number of episodes of sepsis.

Carvedilol as the new non-selective beta-blocker of choice in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension

Portal hypertension (PH) is the most common complication ofcirrhosis and represents the main driver of hepatic decompensation. The overarching goal of PH treatments in patients with compensated cirrhosis is to reduce the risk of hepatic decompensation (i.e development of ascites, variceal bleeding and/or hepatic encephalopathy). In decompensated patients, PH-directed therapies aim at avoiding further decompensation (i.e. recurrent/refractory ascites, variceal rebleeding, recurrent encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or hepatorenal syndrome) and at improving survival. Carvedilol is a non-selective beta-blocker (NSBB) acting on hyperdynamic circulation/splanchnic vasodilation and on intrahepatic resistance. It has shown superior efficacy than traditional NSBBs in lowering PH in patients with cirrhosis and may be, therefore, the NSBB of choice for the treatment of clinically significant portal hypertension. In primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, carvedilol has been demonstrated to be more effective than endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). In patients with compensated cirrhosis carvedilol achieves higher rate of hemodynamic response than propranolol, resulting in a decreased risk of hepatic decompensation. In secondary prophylaxis, the combination of EVL with carvedilol may prevent rebleeding and non-bleeding further decompensation better than that with propranolol. In patients with ascites and gastroesophageal varices, carvedilol is safe and may improve survival, as long as no impairment of the systemic hemodynamic or renal dysfunction occurs, with maintained arterial blood pressure as suitable safety surrogate. The target dose of carvedilol to treat PH should be 12.5 mg/day. This review summarizes the evidence behind Baveno-VII recommendations on the use of carvedilol in patients with cirrhosis.

To TIPS or Not to TIPS in High Risk of Variceal Rebleeding and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

Variceal bleeding is a consequence of severe portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis. Although the rate of bleeding has decreased over time, variceal bleeding in the presence of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) carries a high risk of treatment failure and short-term mortality. Treatment and/or removal of precipitating events (mainly bacterial infection and alcoholic hepatitis) and decrease of portal pressure may improve outcome of patients with acute decompensation or ACLF. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSs), especially in the preemptive situation, have been found to efficiently control bleeding, prevent rebleeding, and reduce short-term mortality. Therefore, TIPS placement should be considered as an option in the management of ACLF patients with variceal bleeding.

Beta-blockers in the era of precision medicine in patients with cirrhosis

For decades, non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) have been the standard of care for the primary and secondary prevention of bleeding from oesophageal varices. However, several questions regarding the best clinical use of NSBBs remain unanswered and new data continue to emerge. Herein, we aim to delineate the therapeutic window of NSBBs in cirrhosis from a more individualised perspective. We address the current controversy of widening the therapeutic window and prescribing NSBBs to all patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. Although transient elastography is useful to rule-in clinically significant portal hypertension, we lack robust data supporting the use of NSBBs in patients without varices. While most data are based on propranolol, accumulating evidence suggests that carvedilol is superior and should be the first-line treatment until the decompensated stage. The clinical risk-to-benefit ratio appears to deteriorate in advanced decompensated stages and the risk of harm is high in patients with refractory ascites, low blood pressure and renal impairment, which clinically define closure of the therapeutic window. We also critically review non-invasive surrogates and biomarkers for predicting the haemodynamic response to NSBBs and confirm that the absence of reliable non-invasive methods is one of the main challenges facing the field.

High accuracy of spleen stiffness measurement in diagnosing clinically significant portal hypertension in metabolic-associated fatty liver disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) by vibration-controlled transient elastography (VCTE) has been tested in a limited number of studies versus hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), especially with the 100 Hz spleen-specific module. The current study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of this novel module for detecting clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) in a cohort of compensated patients with metabolic-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) as the main aetiology and to improve the performance of the Baveno VII criteria for CSPH diagnosis by including SSM.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-centre study including patients with available measurements of HVPG, Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and SSM by VCTE with the 100 Hz module. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve analysis was conducted to identify dual cut-offs (rule-out and rule-in) associated with the absence/presence of CSPH. The diagnostic algorithms were adequate if negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive values (PPV) were >90%.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were included, 60 MAFLD and 25 non-MAFLD. SSM showed a good correlation with HVPG (MAFLD: r = .74; p < .0001; non-MAFLD: r = .62; p < .0011). In MAFLD patients, SSM had a high accuracy in discarding/diagnosing CSPH (cut-off values of <40.9 and >49.9 kPa, AUC 0.95). The addition of these cut-offs in a sequential or combined approach to the Baveno VII criteria significantly reduced the grey zone (60% vs. 15%-20%), while maintaining adequate NPV and PPV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the utility of SSM for diagnosing CSPH in MAFLD patients and demonstrate that the addition of SSM to the Baveno VII criteria increases accuracy.

Pharmacotherapies for Portal Hypertension: Current Status and Expanding Indications

Purpose

Non-selective beta blockers remain pharmacotherapy of choice for prevention of first episode of variceal bleeding (primary prevention) and for prevention of its recurrence after initial hemostasis (secondary prophylaxis). This review will update the current and emerging pharmacological therapies for portal hypertension.

Recent findings

Data have emerged on carvedilol in preventing hepatic decompensation and improving patient survival among patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. Because measurement of WHVP is invasive and not feasible in routine practice, non-invasive tests with liver stiffness measurement in combination with platelet count may be accurate in identifying clinically significant portal hypertension.

Summary

Carvedilol is more effective in reducing portal pressure compared to nadolol or propranolol. Its use has expanded to reduce risk of hepatic decompensation among patients with CSPH, which can be identified non-invasively using liver stiffness and platelet count. Studies are needed on non-invasive biomarkers to guide and optimize pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension.

Review article: controversies surrounding the use of carvedilol and other beta blockers in the management of portal hypertension and cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Advanced chronic liver disease is an increasing cause of premature morbidity and mortality in the UK. Portal hypertension is the primary driver of decompensation, including the development of ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and variceal haemorrhage. Non-selective beta blockers (NSBB) reduce portal pressure and are well established in the prevention of variceal haemorrhage. Carvedilol, a newer NSBB, is more effective at reducing portal pressure due to additional α-adrenergic blockade and has additional anti-oxidant, anti-inflammatory and anti-fibrotic effects.

AIM

To summarise the available evidence on the use of beta blockers, specifically carvedilol, in cirrhosis, focussing on when and why to start METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of PubMed for relevant publications.

RESULTS

International guidelines advise the use of NSBB in primary prophylaxis against variceal haemorrhage in those with high-risk varices, with substantial evidence of efficacy comparable with endoscopic band ligation (EBL). NSBB are also well established in secondary prophylaxis, in combination with EBL. More controversial is their use in patients without large varices, but with clinically significant portal hypertension. However, there is gathering evidence that NSBB, particularly carvedilol, reduce the risk of decompensation and improve survival. While caution is advised in patients with advanced cirrhosis and refractory ascites, recent evidence suggests that NSBB can continue to be used safely, and that premature discontinuation may be detrimental.

CONCLUSIONS

With increasing evidence of benefit independent of variceal bleeding, namely retardation of decompensation and improvement in survival, it is time to consider whether carvedilol should be offered to all patients with advanced chronic liver disease.

Nonselective beta blockers, hepatic decompensation, and mortality in cirrhosis: A national cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Little is known about the effectiveness of nonselective beta blockers (NSBBs) in preventing hepatic decompensation in routine clinical settings. We investigated whether NSBBs are associated with hepatic decompensation or liver-related mortality in a national cohort of veterans with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) A cirrhosis with no prior decompensations.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

In an active comparator, new user (ACNU) design, we created a cohort of new users of carvedilol ( n = 123) versus new users of selective beta blockers (SBBs) ( n = 561) and followed patients for up to 3 years. An inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) approach balanced demographic and clinical confounders. The primary analysis simulated intention-to-treat ("pseudo-ITT") with IPTW-adjusted Cox models; secondary analyses were pseudo-as-treated, and both were adjusted for baseline and time-updating drug confounders. Subgroup analyses evaluated NSBB effects by HCV viremia status, CTP class, platelet count, alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD) etiology, and age. In pseudo-ITT analyses of carvedilol versus SBBs, carvedilol was associated with a lower hazard of any hepatic decompensation (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42-0.83) and the composite outcome of hepatic decompensation/liver-related mortality (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.76). Results were similar in pseudo-as-treated analyses (hepatic decompensation: HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.94; composite outcome: HR 0.62, 95% 0.38-1.01). In subgroup analyses, carvedilol was associated with lower hazard of primary outcomes in the absence of HCV viremia, higher CTP class and platelet count, younger age, and ALD etiology.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an ongoing need to noninvasively identify patients who may benefit from NSBBs for the prevention of hepatic decompensation.

Liver Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension

The understanding of pathogenesis of portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis continues to evolve. In addition to progressive fibrosis, cirrhosis is characterized by parenchymal extinction and vascular remodelling, causing architectural distortion. Existence of prothrombotic state and more recently, intestinal bacterial dysbiosis are recently described in the pathogenesis of portal hypertension. Clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) is an important prognostic milestone in patients with liver cirrhosis. This is a pre-symptomatic phase that predicts the development of varices, ascites and importantly increased risk of Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). CSPH is associated with significantly reduced survival. Endoscopic surveillance is necessary in these patients. Non-selective Beta-blocker is the preferred therapy for primary prophylaxis in the management of portal hypertension. Patients with acute variceal bleed should be resuscitated appropriately, followed by vasoactive drugs and endoscopic therapy. Early TIPS should be considered in those with refractory bleed or in endoscopic treatment failure. Application of artificial intelligence and machine learning may be useful in future for identifying patients at risk of variceal hemorrhage.

The Baveno VII concept of cirrhosis recompensation

Traditionally, the progression from compensated to decompensated cirrhosis has been regarded as a point of no return in the natural history of the disease. However, this point of view is increasingly being challenged by new evidence on disease regression and hepatic recompensation upon suppression/cure of the underlying aetiology. In order to create a uniform definition of recompensated cirrhosis, standardised criteria have been set out by the Baveno VII consensus, which include the removal of the primary aetiological factor, the resolution of any decompensating events and a sustained improvement in hepatic function. Initial insights into the concept of hepatic recompensation come from previous studies, which have demonstrated that a cure/suppression of the underlying aetiology in patients with prior decompensation leads to significant clinical improvements and favourable outcomes and can even enable the delisting of transplant candidates. Nevertheless, future studies are required to shed light on the natural history of hepatic recompensation, assess modifying factors and potential non-invasive biomarkers of recompensation and explore the molecular mechanisms of disease regression.

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.

Evolution of care in cirrhosis: Preventing hepatic decompensation through pharmacotherapy

Cirrhosis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, impacting more than 120 million people worldwide. Although geographic differences exist, etiologic factors such as alcohol use disorder, chronic viral hepatitis infections, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease are prevalent in nearly every region. Historically, significant effort has been devoted to modifying these risks to prevent disease progression. Nevertheless, more than 11% of patients with compensated cirrhosis experience hepatic decompensation each year. This transition signifies the most important prognostic factor in the natural history of the disease, corresponding to a decline in median survival to below 2 years. Over the past decade, the need for pharmacotherapies aimed at reducing the risk for hepatic decompensation has been emphasized, and non-selective beta-blockers have emerged as the most effective option to date. However, a critical therapeutic gap still exists, and additional therapies have been proposed, including statins, rifaximin, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Based on the results of innovative retrospective analyses and small-scale prospective trials, these pharmacotherapies represent promising options, but further studies, including randomized controlled trials, are necessary before they can be incorporated into clinical use. This report highlights the potential impact of these agents and others in preventing hepatic decompensation and discusses how this paradigm shift may pave the way for guideline-directed medical therapy in cirrhosis.

Emerging Therapeutic Targets for Portal Hypertension

Purpose of Review

Portal hypertension is responsible of the main complications of cirrhosis, which carries a high mortality. Recent treatments have improved prognosis, but this is still far from ideal. This paper reviews new potential therapeutic targets unveiled by advances of key pathophysiologic processes.

Recent Findings

Recent research highlighted the importance of suppressing etiologic factors and a safe lifestyle and outlined new mechanisms modulating portal pressure. These include intrahepatic abnormalities linked to inflammation, fibrogenesis, vascular occlusion, parenchymal extinction, and angiogenesis; impaired regeneration; increased hepatic vascular tone due to sinusoidal endothelial dysfunction with insufficient NO availability; and paracrine liver cell crosstalk. Moreover, pathways such as the gut-liver axis modulate splanchnic vasodilatation and systemic inflammation, exacerbate liver fibrosis, and are being targeted by therapy. We have summarized studies of new agents addressing these targets.

Summary

New agents, alone or in combination, allow acting in complementary mechanisms offering a more profound effect on portal hypertension while simultaneously limiting disease progression and favoring regression of fibrosis and of cirrhosis. Major changes in treatment paradigms are anticipated.

Baveno-VII criteria to predict decompensation and initiate non-selective beta-blocker in compensated advanced chronic liver disease patients

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The utility of Baveno-VII criteria of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) to predict decompensation in compensated advanced chronic liver disease (cACLD) patient needs validation. We aim to validate the performance of CSPH criteria to predict the risk of decompensation in an international real-world cohort of cACLD patients.

METHODS

cACLD patients were stratified into three categories (CSPH excluded, grey zone, and CSPH). The risks of decompensation across different CSPH categories were estimated using competing risk regression for clustered data, with death and hepatocellular carcinoma as competing events. The performance of "treating definite CSPH" strategy to prevent decompensation using non-selective beta-blocker (NSBB) was compared against other strategies in decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred fifty-nine cACLD patients (36.8% had CSPH) were included; 7.2% experienced decompensation over a median follow-up of 40 months. Non-invasive assessment of CSPH predicts a 5-fold higher risk of liver decompensation in cACLD patients (subdistribution hazard ratio, 5.5; 95% confidence interval, 4.0-7.4). "Probable CSPH" is suboptimal to predict decompensation risk in cACLD patients. CSPH exclusion criteria reliably exclude cACLD patients at risk of decompensation, regardless of etiology. Among the grey zone, the decompensation risk was negligible among viral-related cACLD, but was substantially higher among the non-viral cACLD group. Decision curve analysis showed that "treating definite CSPH" strategy is superior to "treating all varices" or "treating probable CSPH" strategy to prevent decompensation using NSBB.

CONCLUSION

Non-invasive assessment of CSPH may stratify decompensation risk and the need for NSBB in cACLD patients.

[Current diagnostics and treatment of portal hypertension]

In industrial nations portal hypertension is mostly a consequence of liver cirrhosis and is a prerequisite for complications, such as esophageal varices and ascites. The pathophysiology of portal hypertension is complex. It is defined as an increase in the hepatovenous pressure gradient to > 5 mm Hg, with complications to be expected at ≥ 10 mm Hg. Measurement of the pressure of the hepatic vein occlusion is the gold standard for estimating portal pressure but this is not very practical. Liver elastography, in particular, has proven to be an effective noninvasive tool to identify patients with clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). Current treatment concepts address the CSPH even before the onset of complications to reduce the likelihood of decompensation. In addition to beta blockers, a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is the most important procedure to lower portal vein pressure and enables an improvement in the prognosis of selected patients.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI < 30 kg/m2] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] > 10 mmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography > 25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70 g/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1 g/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250 mg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C  ≤ 13 or Child-Pugh B > 7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG > 20 mmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.