Hepatic vein pressure gradient reduction and prevention of variceal bleeding in cirrhosis: a systematic review

Invasive and non-invasive assessment of portal hypertension

Portal hypertension is the central driver of complications in patients with chronic liver diseases and cirrhosis. The diagnosis of portal hypertension has important prognostic and clinical implications. In particular, screening for varices in patients with portal hypertension can effectively reduce the morbidity and mortality of variceal bleeding. In this article, we review the invasive and non-invasive methods to assess portal hypertension. Hepatic venous pressure gradient remains the gold standard to measure portal pressure but is invasive and seldom performed outside expert centers and research settings. In recent years, a number of non-invasive tests of fibrosis have shown good correlation with liver histology. They also show promise in identifying patients with portal hypertension and large varices. As a result, the latest Baveno VI consensus guidelines endorse the use of liver stiffness measurement by transient elastography and platelet count as initial assessment to select patients for varices screening. On the other hand, the performance of non-invasive tests in assessing the response to non-selective beta-blockers or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting is either suboptimal or unclear.

Nadolol reduces insulin sensitivity in liver cirrhosis: a randomized double-blind crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Liver cirrhosis is frequently complicated by portal hypertension leading to increased mortality from variceal bleeding and hepatic decompensation. Noncardioselective β-blockers not only reduce portal hypertension and prevent variceal bleeding in cirrhosis but also impair glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity in other settings. This study aimed to determine whether nonselective β-blockade with nadolol impairs glucose metabolism in liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of nadolol in cirrhotic patients examined insulin sensitivity, disposition index, and glucose tolerance. Stable cirrhotic patients of mixed etiology underwent an intravenous glucose tolerance test and hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp for the measurement of insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity (n = 16) and a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (n = 17). These measurements were conducted twice (after 3 months of treatment with nadolol or placebo and, after a 1-month washout period, after 3 months on the alternative treatment). Total body fat and plasma catecholamines were measured at the end of each 3-month treatment.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, nadolol treatment reduced insulin sensitivity (79.7 ± 10.1 vs 99.6 ± 10.3 μL/kg fat-free mass·min^-1 ·(mU/L)^-1 , P = .005). Insulin secretion was unchanged (P = .24), yielding a lower disposition index with nadolol (6083 ± 2007 vs 8692 ± 2036, P = .050). There was no change in total body fat or plasma catecholamines. A 2-hour plasma glucose concentration from the oral glucose tolerance test was higher on nadolol than placebo (10.8 ± 0.9 vs 9.9 ± 0.9 mmol/L, P = .035).

CONCLUSIONS

Nadolol significantly worsened insulin sensitivity, glycemia, and disposition index in patients with liver cirrhosis. These findings may have significant clinical implications because cirrhosis is already associated with an increased prevalence of diabetes.

Use of Wireless Capsule Endoscopy for the Diagnosis and Grading of Esophageal Varices in Patients With Portal Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Esophageal variceal bleeding is a severe complication of portal hypertension with significant morbidity and mortality. Although traditional screening and grading of esophageal varices has been performed by endogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), wireless video capsule endoscopy provides a minimally invasive alternative that may improve screening and surveillance compliance.

AIM OF THE STUDY

The aim of the study was to perform a systematic review and structured meta-analysis of all eligible studies to evaluate the efficacy of wireless capsule endoscopy for screening and diagnosis of esophageal varices among patients with portal hypertension.

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were performed through December 2015. Bivariate and hierarchical models were used to compute the pooled sensitivity and specificity, and to plot the summary receiver operating characteristics curve with summary point and corresponding 95% confidence region. Bias of included studies was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies from 2005 to 2015 were included in this meta-analysis (n=1328). The diagnostic accuracy of wireless capsule endoscopy in the diagnosis of esophageal varices was 90% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.88-0.93]. The diagnostic pooled sensitivity and specificity were 83% (95% CI, 0.76-0.89) and 85% (95% CI, 0.75-0.91), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of wireless capsule endoscopy for the grading of medium to large varices was 92% (95% CI, 0.90-0.94). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 72% (95% CI, 0.54-0.85) and 91% (95% CI, 0.86-0.94), respectively, for the grading of medium to large varices. The use of capsule demonstrated only mild adverse events. A sensitivity analysis limited to only high quality studies revealed similar results.

DISCUSSION

Wireless esophageal capsule endoscopy is well tolerated and safe in patients with liver cirrhosis and suspicion of portal hypertension. The sensitivity of capsule endoscopy is not currently sufficient to replace EGD as a first exploration in these patients, but given its high accuracy, it may have a role in cases of refusal or contraindication to EGD.

Application of a standardised protocol for hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement improves quality of readings and facilitates reduction of variceal bleeding in cirrhotics

INTRODUCTION

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement is recommended for prognostic and therapeutic indications in centres with adequate resources and expertise. Our study aimed to evaluate the quality of HVPG measurements at our centre before and after introduction of a standardised protocol, and the clinical relevance of the HVPG to variceal bleeding in cirrhotics.

METHODS

HVPG measurements performed at Singapore General Hospital from 2005-2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Criteria for quality HVPG readings were triplicate readings, absence of negative pressure values and variability of ≤ 2 mmHg. The rate of variceal bleeding was compared in cirrhotics who achieved a HVPG response to pharmacotherapy (reduction of the HVPG to < 12 mmHg or by ≥ 20% of baseline) and those who did not.

RESULTS

126 HVPG measurements were performed in 105 patients (mean age 54.7 ± 11.4 years; 55.2% men). 80% had liver cirrhosis and 20% had non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH). The mean overall HVPG was 13.5 ± 7.2 mmHg, with a significant difference between the cirrhosis and NCPH groups (p < 0.001). The proportion of quality readings significantly improved after the protocol was introduced. HVPG response was achieved in 28 (33.3%, n = 84) cirrhotics. Nine had variceal bleeding over a median follow-up of 29 months. The rate of variceal bleeding was significantly lower in HVPG responders compared to nonresponders (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

The quality of HVPG measurements in our centre improved after the introduction of a standardised protocol. A HVPG response can prognosticate the risk of variceal bleeding in cirrhotics.

Prevention and treatment of variceal haemorrhage in 2017

Variceal haemorrhage is a major complication of portal hypertension that still causes high mortality in patients with cirrhosis. Improved knowledge of the pathophysiology of portal hypertension has recently led to a more comprehensive approach to prevent all the complications of this condition. Thus, optimal treatment of portal hypertension requires a strategy that takes into account the clinical stage of the disease and all the major variables that affect the risk of progression to the next stage and death. In patients with compensated liver disease, the correction of factors influencing the progression of fibrosis, in particular aetiologic factors, is now feasible in many cases and should be achieved to prevent the development or progression of gastroesophageal varices and hepatic decompensation. Once gastroesophageal varices have developed, non-selective beta-blockers remain the cornerstone of therapy. Carvedilol provides a greater decrease in portal pressure and is currently indicated as a first-choice therapy for primary prophylaxis. The treatment of acute variceal haemorrhage includes a combination of vasoactive drugs, antibiotics and endoscopic variceal band ligation. In high-risk patients, the early use of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) lowers the risk of re-bleeding and improves survival. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is the choice for uncontrolled variceal bleeding; a self-expandable metal stent or balloon tamponade can be used as a bridging measure. The combination of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation reduces the risk of recurrent variceal bleeding and improves survival. In these cases, statins seem to further improve survival. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is indicated in patients who rebleed during secondary prophylaxis.

Compensating effect of minor portal hypertension on the muscle mass loss-related poor prognosis in cirrhosis

Background: To examine the influence of the severity of portal hemodynamic abnormality on the prognosis of cirrhosis with respect to the muscle mass loss (MML). Methods: The study involved a subgroup analysis in 98 cirrhosis patients (63.5 ± 11.8 years) who prospectively underwent both Doppler ultrasound and hepatic venous catheterization. The prognostic influence of MML diagnosed by computed tomography using the L3 skeletal muscle index was evaluated (median observation period, 32.7 months). Results: The cumulative survival rate showed difference between patients with MML (n = 34; 82.2%/1year, 41.2%/3years and 36.1%/5years) and those without (n = 64; 92.1%/1year, 74.9%/3years and 69.4%/5years; P = 0.005). When divided with respect to the portal velocity, the survival rate showed differences between patients with and without MML in the cohort < 12.8 cm/s (n=52, p=0.009) and ≥ 12.8 cm/s (n=44, p=0.041). The survival rate also showed differences between patients with MML (n = 24; 78.8%/1year, 40.6%/3years and 34.8%/5years) and those without (n = 45; 91.1%/1year, 71.3%/3years and 63.1%/5years; P = 0.008) in the cohort with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) > 12 mmHg. However, in the cohort with HVPG ≤ 12 mmHg, survival rate showed no difference between patients with MML (n=10; 100%/1year, 61.9%/3years and 61.9%/5years) and those without (n=19; 93.8%/1year, 71.2%/3years and 59.4%/5years; p = 0.493) Conclusion: Lower HVPG has a compensating effect on the MML-induced poor prognosis of cirrhosis. Care should be taken in the evaluation of the influence of MML in consideration of the severity of portal hypertension.

Non-selective β-blockers in advanced cirrhosis: a critical review of the effects on overall survival and renal function

INTRODUCTION

Non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs) are widely prescribed in patients with cirrhosis for primary and secondary prophylaxis of bleeding oesophageal varices. Furthermore, it has been suggested that the clinical benefits of NSBBs may extend beyond their haemodynamic effects. Recently, a potentially harmful effect has been described in patients with refractory ascites or spontaneous bacterial peritonitis.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive literature search on β-blockers and cirrhosis survival using the electronic databases PubMed/MEDLINE, AMED, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Full-text manuscripts published over more than 35 years, from 1980 to April 2016 were reviewed for relevance and reference lists were cross-checked for additional pertinent studies regarding potential NSBB effects, especially focused on those concerned with survival and/or acute kidney injury (AKI).

DISCUSSION

The proposed review will be able to provide valuable evidence to help decision making in the use of NSBB for the treatment of advanced cirrhosis and highlights some limitations in existing evidence to direct future research.

Risk and Predictors of Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis Patients Receiving Primary Prophylaxis With Non-Selective Beta-Blockers

OBJECTIVES

Prior studies have demonstrated the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) in preventing first variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. However, little is known about the overall effectiveness of NSBB in routine clinical care.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of cirrhotic patients without prior bleeding who initiated a NSBB (propranolol, nadolol) at any Veterans Administration facility between 2008 and 2013. The primary outcome was variceal bleeding within 12 months. We conducted Cox-proportional hazards analyses to identify demographic, clinical, and NSBB-related (type of NSBB, mean dose, dose change, and heart rate response) factors associated with variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

Of 5,775 patients, 678 (11.7%) developed variceal bleeding. Mean daily dose of NSBB was <40 mg in 58.8%, 18.1% had either upward or downward titration in NSBB dose, and 9.8% had hemodynamic response. Patients who were younger, with ascites, greater medical comorbidity, and higher MELD (Model for end-stage liver disease) scores had a higher risk of variceal bleeding. Patients on a higher daily dose (>60 vs. <40 mg, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-0.81), who had either upward or downward dose titration (adjusted HR 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.90 and 0.64; 95% CI 0.45-0.90, respectively), and those who achieved hemodynamic response (adjusted HR 0.75; 95% CI=0.57-1.0) had lower risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 12% of patients bled while being on NSBB for primary prophylaxis. A higher NSBB dose and dose titration were protective; yet most patients did not have the NSBB dose titrated to the recommended levels. Our data highlight the need for careful monitoring of cirrhotic patients on NSBB.

Regression of fibrosis and portal hypertension in HCV-associated cirrhosis and sustained virologic response after interferon-free antiviral therapy

It is still controversial, whether and to what amount cirrhosis and portal hypertension are reversible in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV)-associated cirrhosis and sustained virologic response (SVR) after interferon-free antiviral therapy. In this study, we prospectively evaluated dynamics of liver and spleen stiffness in HCV-infected patients with advanced liver disease and SVR after interferon-free treatment. A total of 54 patients with HCV-associated cirrhosis and SVR were included. Liver and spleen stiffness was measured at therapy baseline (BL), end of treatment (EOT) and 24 weeks after EOT (FU24) by transient liver elastography (L-TE) as well as by acoustic radiation force impulse of the liver (L-ARFI) and spleen (S-ARFI), as well as biochemical, virologic and clinical data. Improvement of liver and spleen stiffness was found in 44 of 50 (88%), 31 of 54 (57%) and 25 of 54 (46%) of patients assessed by L-TE, L-ARFI and S-ARFI between baseline and FU24. Liver stiffness assessed by L-TE improved between BL [median (range), 32.5 (9.1-75) kPa] and EOT [median (range), 21.3 (6.7-73.5) kPa; (P<.0001)], and between BL and FU24 [median (range), 21.2 (5.4-70) kPa; (P<.0001)]. Liver stiffness assessed by L-ARFI improved between BL [median (range), 2.7 (1.2-4.1) m/s] and FU24 [median (range), 2.4 (1.2-3.9) m/s; P=.002), while spleen stiffness remained unchanged. Our data suggest that improvement of liver stiffness may be rather due to reduced necroinflammation and may be due to a less extent to regression of cirrhosis, as dynamics of liver stiffness improvement was more pronounced between BL and EOT than BL and FU24.

A Randomized, Multi-Center, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Carvedilol vs. Propranolol to Reduce Portal Pressure in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis

OBJECTIVES

Propranolol has been used as prophylaxis for variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. More recent data suggest that carvedilol may be more effective for reducing the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) than propranolol. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the hemodynamic response to carvedilol compared with propranolol.

METHODS

A total of 110 patients with a baseline HVPG value >12 mm Hg were allocated randomly to receive either carvedilol or propranolol. The HVPG measurement was repeated after 6 weeks of daily medication. The primary end point was a ≥20% fall in HVPG compared with baseline or <12 mm Hg.

RESULTS

The difference in the proportion of responders in the carvedilol (49.1%) vs. propranolol (30.9%) groups did not reach statistical significance in the intention-to-treat analysis (P=0.08). However, among patients with a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥15, carvedilol resulted in a significantly greater response than that of propranolol (7/12, 58.3% vs. 0/10, 0%; P=0.005). Similarly, carvedilol was superior to propranolol in patients with Child-Pugh score ≥9 (46.2 vs. 0%; P=0.046). The presence of ascites also had a significant influence on the response rate (51.5 vs. 24.2%; P=0.042). A MELD score ≥15 was the only significant predictor of response among these post hoc groups after adjusting for multiple comparisons (P=0.005). Severe adverse events were higher in the carvedilol group although drug-associated adverse events were not different.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, carvedilol offered no clear advantage over propranolol but it may be more effective in advanced cirrhotic patients with a MELD score≥15 in reducing the portal pressure gradient. However, this potential benefit may come with a cost of increased risk of side-effects and outcome data over a longer term is needed to understand the relative risk benefit.

The interpretation of hepatic venous pressure gradient tracings - excellent interobserver agreement unrelated to experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) plays an important role in the diagnosis, prognosis and therapy of patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. One barrier to its widespread use is the potential for a low reproducibility. We aimed to evaluate the interobserver agreement in the interpretation of optimally acquired HVPG tracings from patients with cirrhosis and different degrees of portal hypertension.

METHODS

Two hundred and fifteen tracings obtained from 51 patients with cirrhosis in a single centre were interpreted independently by two hepatologists: one experienced observer and one inexperienced observer. Correlation was performed by Pearson linear regression and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A Bland-Altman plot was constructed to visualize how the differences between observers compared across the range of measurements. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of ≥10% variation between observers' readings.

RESULTS

There was a significant linear relationship between observers' readings r = 0.98 (P = 0.001). The ICC between observers (interobserver agreement) was also excellent at 0.991 (P = 0.001). Using the Bland-Altman technique, the mean difference between the observers' readings was 0.2 mmHg (95% CI: -1.2 mmHg to 1.6 mmHg). Thirteen per cent of all readings and 9% of readings with an HVPG of ≥10 mmHg differed by ≥10%. As expected, a lower baseline HVPG was a predictor of this variability.

CONCLUSIONS

Interobserver reproducibility in the assessment of optimally acquired HVPG tracings is excellent without differences related to experience. The data provide further support that the HVPG can be used accurately in clinical and research settings.

The Beneficial Effect of Beta-Blockers in Patients With Cirrhosis, Portal Hypertension and Ascites

BACKGROUND

Patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertensive complications have reduced survival. As such, it has been suggested that nonselective beta-blocker therapy in patients with advanced ascites is harmful. The aim of this study was, therefore, to determine the risk of mortality in patients with cirrhosis and ascites taking nonselective beta-blocker therapy for the prevention of variceal hemorrhage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of 2,419 patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension admitted to Parkland Memorial Hospital (a university-affiliated county teaching hospital) from 2003-2010. Patients were subdivided into those with varices only, ascites only and those with both varices and ascites. The primary outcome measure for this study was all-cause in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 68 of 1,039 (6.5%) patients taking beta-blockers died during their hospitalization, while 223 of 1,380 (16.2%) patients not taking beta-blockers died (P < 0.001). Beta-blocker use was also assessed in specific cohorts; mortality was 21.1% in patients with severe ascites with varices who were not taking beta-blockers compared with 8.9% in patients who were taking beta-blockers (P = 0.05). Overall, fewer patients taking beta-blockers died compared with those not taking beta-blockers in patients with varices only (6.4% versus 12.1%) and those with ascites with or without varices (6.6% versus 18.1%) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality was lower in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension taking nonselective beta-blockers than in those not taking beta-blockers. The use of nonselective beta-blockers provided a significant survival benefit in patients with all grades of ascites, including those with severe ascites.

Emerging therapies for portal hypertension in cirrhosis

INTRODUCTION

Counteracting splanchnic vasodilatation and increased portal-collateral blood flow has been the mainstay for the treatment of portal hypertension (PH) over the past three decades. However, there is still large room for improvement in the treatment of PH.

AREAS COVERED

The basic mechanism leading to portal hypertension is the increased hepatic vascular resistance to portal blood flow caused by liver structural abnormalities inherent to cirrhosis and increased hepatic vascular tone. Molecules modulating microvascular dysfunction which have undergone preclinical and clinical trials are summarized, potential drug development issues are addressed, and situations relevant to design of clinical trials are considered.

EXPERT OPINION

Experimental and clinical evidence indicates that molecules modulating liver microvascular dysfunction may allow for 30-40% reduction in portal pressure. Several agents could be utilized in the earlier stages of cirrhosis (antifibrotics, antiangiogenics, etiological therapies) may allow reduction of fibrosis and halt progression of PH. This 'nip at the bud' policy, by combining therapies with existing agents used in advanced phase of cirrhosis and novel agents which could be used in early phase of cirrhotic spectrum, which are likely to hit the market soon would be the future strategy for PH therapy.

Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis: Limited Available Treatment Options but Promising Drugs in Development and Recent Progress Towards a Regulatory Approval Pathway

The prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is increasing world-wide in parallel to the increase of the obesity epidemic. Insulin resistance (IR) and the accumulation of triglyceride-derived toxic lipid metabolites play a key role in its pathogenesis. Multiple biomarkers are being evaluated for the non-invasive diagnosis of NASH. However, a percutaneous liver biopsy is still the gold standard method; the minimal diagnostic criteria include the presence of >5 % macrovesicular steatosis, inflammation, and liver cell ballooning. Several pharmaceutical agents have been evaluated for the treatment of NASH; however, no single therapy has been approved so far. Due to the increasing prevalence and the health burden, there is a high need to develop therapeutic strategies for patients with NASH targeting both those with early-stage disease as well as those with advanced liver fibrosis. There are unique challenges in the design of studies for these target populations. Collaborative efforts of health authorities, medical disease experts, and the pharmaceutical industry are ongoing to align options for a registrational pathway. Several companies pursuing different mechanisms of action are nearing the end of phase II with their candidates. This manuscript reviews those compounds with a variety of mode of actions that have been evaluated and/or are currently being tested with the goal of achieving a NAFLD/NASH indication.

Carvedilol for portal hypertension in cirrhosis: systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the clinical and haemodynamic effects of carvedilol for patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed, Cochrane library databases, EMBASE and the Science Citation Index Expanded through December 2015. Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included.

OUTCOME MEASURE

We calculated clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality, bleeding-related mortality, upper gastrointestinal bleeding) as well as haemodynamic outcomes (hepatic venous pressure (HVPG) reduction, haemodynamic response rate, post-treatment arterial blood pressure (mean arterial pressure; MAP) and adverse events).

RESULTS

12 RCTs were included. In 7 trials that looked at haemodynamic outcomes compared carvedilol versus propranolol, showing that carvedilol was associated with a greater reduction (%) of HVPG within 6 months (mean difference -8.49, 95% CI -12.36 to -4.63) without a greater reduction in MAP than propranolol. In 3 trials investigating differences in clinical outcomes between carvedilol versus endoscopic variceal band ligation (EVL), no significant differences in mortality or variceal bleeding were demonstrated. 1 trial compared clinical outcomes between carvedilol versus nadolol plus isosorbide-5-mononitrate (ISMN), and showed that no significant difference in mortality or bleeding had been found. 1 trial comparing carvedilol versus nebivolol showed a greater reduction in HVPG after 14 days follow-up in the carvedilol group.

CONCLUSIONS

Carvedilol may be more effective in decreasing HVPG than propranolol or nebivolol and it may be as effective as EVL or nadolol plus ISMN in preventing variceal bleeding. However, the overall quality of evidence is low. Further large-scale randomised studies are required before we can make firm conclusions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42015020542.

Addition of Simvastatin to Standard Therapy for the Prevention of Variceal Rebleeding Does Not Reduce Rebleeding but Increases Survival in Patients With Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The combination of β-blockers and band ligation is the standard approach to prevent variceal rebleeding, but bleeding recurs and mortality is high. The lipid-lowering drug simvastatin decreases portal pressure, improves hepatocellular function, and might reduce liver fibrosis. We assessed whether adding simvastatin to standard therapy could reduce rebleeding and death after variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter, double-blind, parallel trial of 158 patients with cirrhosis receiving standard prophylaxis to prevent rebleeding (a β-blocker and band ligation) in Spain from October 2010 through October 2013. Within 10 days of bleeding, subjects were randomly assigned, but stratified by Child-Pugh class of A or B vs C, to groups given simvastatin (20 mg/d the first 15 days, 40 mg/d thereafter; n = 69) or placebo (n = 78). Patients were followed for as long as 24 months. The primary end point was a composite of rebleeding and death, and main secondary end points were the individual components of the composite (death and rebleeding).

RESULTS

The primary end point was met by 30 of 78 patients in the placebo group and 22 of 69 in the simvastatin group (P = .423). Seventeen patients in the placebo group died (22%) vs 6 patients in the simvastatin group (9%) (hazard ratio for adding simvastatin to therapy = 0.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.15-0.99; P = .030). Simvastatin did not increase survival of patients with Child-Pugh class C cirrhosis. Rebleeding occurred in 28% of patients in the placebo group and 25% in the simvastatin group (P = .583). Serious adverse events occurred in 53% of patients in the placebo group and 49% in the simvastatin group (P = .752); the percentages of serious adverse events related to therapy were 11% in the placebo group vs 8% in the in the simvastatin group (P = .599). Two patients in the simvastatin group, each with advanced liver disease, developed rhabdomyolysis.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized controlled trial, addition of simvastatin to standard therapy did not reduce rebleeding, but was associated with a survival benefit for patients with Child-Pugh class A or B cirrhosis. Survival was not the primary end point of the study, so these results require validation. The incidence of rhabdomyolysis in patients receiving 40 mg/d simvastatin was higher than expected. European Clinical Trial Database ID: EUDRACT 2009-016500-24; ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01095185.

Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in children and the role of MesoRex Bypass: Summary of the Baveno VI Pediatric Satellite Symposium

Approaches to the management of portal hypertension and variceal hemorrhage in pediatrics remain controversial, in large part because they are not well informed by rigorous clinical studies. Fundamental biological and clinical differences preclude automatic application of approaches used for adults to children. On April 11-12, 2015, experts in the field convened at the first Baveno Pediatric Satellite Meeting to discuss and explore current available evidence regarding indications for MesoRex bypass (MRB) in extrahepatic portal vein obstruction and the role of primary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage in children. Consensus was reached regarding MRB. The vast majority of children with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction will experience complications that can be prevented by successful MRB surgery. Therefore, children with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction should be offered MRB for primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding and other complications, if appropriate surgical expertise is available, if preoperative and intraoperative evaluation demonstrates favorable anatomy, and if appropriate multidisciplinary care is available for postoperative evaluation and management of shunt thrombosis or stenosis. In contrast, consensus was not achieved regarding primary prophylaxis of varices. Although variceal hemorrhage is a concerning complication of portal hypertension in children, the first bleed appears to be only rarely fatal and the associated morbidity has not been well characterized.

CONCLUSION

There are few pediatric data to indicate the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic or endoscopic therapies as primary prophylaxis or that prevention of a sentinel variceal bleed will ultimately improve survival; therefore, no recommendation for primary prophylaxis with endoscopic variceal ligation, sclerotherapy, or nonspecific beta-blockade in children was proposed.

Pre- and Post-Transplant Antiviral Therapy (HBV, HCV)

BACKGROUND

Hepatitis B virus (HBV)- and hepatitis C virus (HCV)-associated liver cirrhosis is a major indication for liver transplantation. This concise review gives an overview about current interferon (IFN)-free treatment options before and after liver transplantation in HBV- or HCV-associated liver disease.

METHODS

A PubMed database search using the terms hepatitis B, hepatitis C, cirrhosis, and liver transplantation was performed to identify significant clinical studies as well as national and international guidelines.

RESULTS

Studies investigating IFN-free treatment in patients with decompensated HBV as well as in HCV-associated cirrhosis are scarce. Hepatic recompensation during antiviral therapy seems more frequent in patients with HBV than in those with HCV-associated cirrhosis. Graft hepatitis B or C is characterized by an accelerated and unfavorable course. Graft infection prophylaxis is safe and efficacious in HBV-related liver transplantation. Eradication of HCV prior to liver transplantation prevents HCV graft infection, and IFN-free treatment of established HCV graft infection is safe and associated with high sustained virologic response rates.

CONCLUSION

Patients with HBV-associated cirrhosis should be treated prior to liver transplantation, and receive a continuing graft infection prophylaxis thereafter. Patients with HCV-associated decompensated cirrhosis may be considered as candidates for antiviral therapy prior to liver transplantation or may be treated subsequently.

Osteopontin: A non-invasive parameter of portal hypertension and prognostic marker of cirrhosis

AIM: To investigate the relationship between osteopontin plasma concentrations and the severity of portal hypertension and to assess osteopontin prognostic value.

METHODS: A cohort of 154 patients with confirmed liver cirrhosis (112 ethylic, 108 men, age 34-72 years) were enrolled in the study. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement and laboratory and ultrasound examinations were carried out for all patients. HVPG was measured using a standard catheterization method with the balloon wedge technique. Osteopontin was measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) method in plasma. Patients were followed up with a specific focus on mortality. The control group consisted of 137 healthy age- and sex- matched individuals.

RESULTS: The mean value of HVPG was 16.18 ± 5.6 mmHg. Compared to controls, the plasma levels of osteopontin in cirrhotic patients were significantly higher (P < 0.001). The plasma levels of osteopontin were positively related to HVPG (P = 0.0022, r = 0.25) and differed among the individual Child-Pugh groups of patients. The cut-off value of 80 ng/mL osteopontin distinguished patients with significant portal hypertension (HVPG above 10 mmHg) at 75% sensitivity and 63% specificity. The mean follow-up of patients was 3.7 ± 2.6 years. The probability of cumulative survival was 39% for patients with HVPG > 10 mmHg and 65% for those with HVPG ≤ 10 mmHg (P = 0.0086, odds ratio (OR), 2.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.09-7.76). Osteopontin showed a similar prognostic value to HVPG. Patients with osteopontin values above 80 ng/mL had significantly lower cumulative survival compared to those with osteopontin ≤ 80 ng/mL (37% vs 56%, P = 0.00035; OR = 2.23, 95%CI: 1.06-4.68).

CONCLUSION: Osteopontin is a non-invasive parameter of portal hypertension that distinguishes patients with clinically significant portal hypertension. It is a strong prognostic factor for survival.

Comparison of hepatic venous pressure gradient and endoscopic grading of esophageal varices

AIM: To determine the correlation between the hepatic venous pressure gradient and the endoscopic grade of esophageal varices.

METHODS: From September 2009 to March 2013, a total of 176 measurements of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) were done in 146 patients. Each transjugular HVPG was measured twice, first using an end whole catheter (EH-HVPG), and then using a balloon catheter (B-HVPG). The HVPG was compared with the endoscopic grade of esophageal varices (according to the general rules for recording endoscopic findings of esophagogastric varices), which was recorded within a month of the measurement of HVPG.

RESULTS: The study included 110 men and 36 women, with a mean age of 56.1 years (range, 43-76 years). The technical success rate of the pressure measurements was 100% and there were no complication related to the procedures. Mean HVPG was 15.3 mmHg as measured using the end hole catheter method and 16.5 mmHg as measured using the balloon catheter method. Mean HVPG (both EH-HVPG and B-HVPG) was not significantly different among patients with different characteristics, including sex and comorbid factors, except for cases with hepatocellular carcinoma (B-HVPG, P = 0.01; EH-HVPG, P = 0.02). Portal hypertension (> 12 mmHg HVPG) occurred in 66% of patients according to EH-HVPG and 83% of patients according to B-HVGP, and significantly correlated with Child’s status (B-HVPG, P < 0.000; EH-HVGP, P < 0.000) and esophageal varies observed upon endoscopy (EH-HVGP, P = 0.003; B-HVGP, P = 0.006). One hundred and thirty-five endoscopies were performed, of which 15 showed normal findings, 27 showed grade 1 endoscopic esophageal varices, 49 showed grade 2 varices, and 44 showed grade 3 varices. When comparing endoscopic esophageal variceal grades and HVPG using univariate analysis, the P value was 0.004 for EH-HVPG and 0.002 for B-HVPG.

CONCLUSION: Both EH-HVPG and B-HVPG showed a positive correlation with the endoscopic grade of esophageal varices, with B-HVPG showing a stronger correlation than EH-HVPG.

Regression of esophageal varices during entecavir treatment in patients with hepatitis-B-virus-related liver cirrhosis

Recent studies suggest that liver cirrhosis is reversible after administering oral nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy to patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. However, few studies have addressed whether esophageal varices can regress after such therapy. We report a case of complete regression of esophageal varices during entecavir therapy in patients with HBV-related liver cirrhosis, suggesting that complications of liver cirrhosis such as esophageal varices can regress after the long-term suppression of HBV replication.

Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient Predicts Long-Term Mortality in Patients with Decompensated Cirrhosis

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to investigate the role of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) for prediction of long-term mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data from 97 non-critically-ill cirrhotic patients with HVPG measurements were retrospectively and consecutively collected between 2009 and 2012. Patients were classified according to clinical stages and presence of ascites. The prognostic accuracy of HVPG for death, survival curves, and hazard ratios were analyzed.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 24 (interquartile range, 13-36) months, 22 patients (22.7%) died. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curves of HVPG for predicting 1-year, 2-year, and overall mortality were 0.801, 0.737, and 0.687, respectively (all p<0.01). The best cut-off value of HVPG for predicting long-term overall mortality in all patients was 17 mm Hg. The mortality rates at 1 and 2 years were 8.9% and 19.2%, respectively: 1.9% and 11.9% with HVPG ≤17 mm Hg and 16.2% and 29.4% with HVPG >17 mm Hg, respectively (p=0.015). In the ascites group, the mortality rates at 1 and 2 years were 3.9% and 17.6% with HVPG ≤17 mm Hg and 17.5% and 35.2% with HVPG >17 mm Hg, respectively (p=0.044). Regarding the risk factors for mortality, both HVPG and model for end-stage liver disease were positively related with long-term mortality in all patients. Particularly, for the patients with ascites, both prothrombin time and HVPG were independent risk factors for predicting poor outcomes.

CONCLUSION

HVPG is useful for predicting the long-term mortality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, especially in the presence of ascites.

Development of hyperdynamic circulation and response to β-blockers in compensated cirrhosis with portal hypertension

Nonselective β-blockers are useful to prevent bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and large varices but not to prevent the development of varices in those with compensated cirrhosis and portal hypertension (PHT). This suggests that the evolutionary stage of PHT may influence the response to β-blockers. To characterize the hemodynamic profile of each stage of PHT in compensated cirrhosis and the response to β-blockers according to stage, we performed a prospective, multicenter (tertiary care setting), cross-sectional study. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and systemic hemodynamic were measured in 273 patients with compensated cirrhosis before and after intravenous propranolol (0.15 mg/kg): 194 patients had an HVPG ≥10 mm Hg (clinically significant PHT [CSPH]), with either no varices (n = 80) or small varices (n = 114), and 79 had an HVPG >5 and <10 mm Hg (subclinical PHT). Patients with CSPH had higher liver stiffness (P < 0.001), worse Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score (P < 0.001), more portosystemic collaterals (P = 0.01) and splenomegaly (P = 0.01) on ultrasound, and lower platelet count (P < 0.001) than those with subclinical PHT. Patients with CSPH had lower systemic vascular resistance (1336 ± 423 versus 1469 ± 335 dyne · s · cm(-5) , P < 0.05) and higher cardiac index (3.3 ± 0.9 versus 2.8 ± 0.4 L/min/m(2) , P < 0.01). After propranolol, the HVPG decreased significantly in both groups, although the reduction was greater in those with CSPH (-16 ± 12% versus -8 ± 9%, P < 0.01). The HVPG decreased ≥10% from baseline in 69% of patients with CSPH versus 35% with subclinical PHT (P < 0.001) and decreased ≥20% in 40% versus 13%, respectively (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with subclinical PHT have less hyperdynamic circulation and significantly lower portal pressure reduction after acute β-blockade than those with CSPH, suggesting that β-blockers are more suitable to prevent decompensation of cirrhosis in patients with CSPH than in earlier stages.

Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: an update

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) haemorrhage is a common cause for admission to hospital and is associated with a mortality of around 10%. Prompt assessment and resuscitation are vital, as are risk stratification of the severity of bleeding, early involvement of the multidisciplinary team and timely access to endoscopy, preferably within 24 h. The majority of bleeds are due to peptic ulcers for which Helicobacter pylori and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents are the main risk factors. Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used before endoscopy, this is controversial. Pre-endoscopic risk stratification with the Glasgow Blatchford score is recommended as is the use of the Rockall score postendoscopy. Endoscopic therapy, with at least two haemostatic modalities, remains the mainstay of treating high-risk lesions and reduces rebleeding rates and mortality. High-dose PPI therapy after endoscopic haemostasis also reduces rebleeding rates and mortality. Variceal oesophageal haemorrhage is associated with a higher rebleeding rate and risk of death. Antibiotics and vasopressin analogues are advised in suspected variceal bleeding; however, endoscopic variceal band ligation remains the haemostatic treatment of choice. Balloon tamponade remains useful in the presence of torrential variceal haemorrhage or when endoscopy fails to secure haemostasis, and can be a bridge to further endoscopic attempts or placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. This review aims to provide an update on the latest evidence-based recommendations for the management of acute upper GI haemorrhage.

Prognosis of acute variceal bleeding: Is being on beta-blockers an aggravating factor? A short-term survival analysis

Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) are widely used because they have been proved effective in the prophylaxis of acute variceal bleeding (AVB). However, a significant proportion of patients still experience AVB while on treatment with NSBB, and its impact on prognosis of AVB is unknown. The present study was aimed at assessing the effect of being on prophylactic therapy with NSBB on 5-day failure and 6-week mortality of patients with cirrhosis admitted with AVB. Included were 142 patients: 49 were receiving prophylactic therapy with NSBB (NSBB group) and 93 were not (control group). There were some differences in the baseline characteristics between the groups: higher proportion of alcoholic etiology and active alcoholism (37% versus 10%), higher platelet count, and lower hematocrit at admission in the control group. However, the severity of AVB and initial treatment were similar. Five-day failure occurred in 20% of patients (14% in NSBB versus 24% in controls, P = 0.27). The adjusted odds ratio for 5-day failure under NSBB was 2.46 (95% confidence interval 0.53-11.37, P = 0.25). Nineteen patients (13%) died, and two had liver transplantation within 6 weeks. The probability of survival at 6 weeks was 96% in the NSBB group and 82% in the control group (P = 0.02). After adjusting by propensity score and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, the NSBB adjusted odds ratio for 6-week mortality was 0.38 (95% confidence interval 0.05-2.63, P = 0.32). The estimated association between NSBB with both 5-day failure and 6-week mortality was homogenous across all Model for End-Stage Liver Disease spectrums.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic NSBB treatment is not a negative prognostic indicator for the short-term survival of patients with cirrhosis admitted with AVB.

The prognostic value of hepatic venous pressure gradient in patients with cirrhosis is highly dependent on the accuracy of the technique

Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), the difference between wedged (WHVP) and free hepatic vein pressure (FHVP), predicts survival in patients with cirrhosis. It has been suggested for the use of inferior vena cava (IVC) value instead of FHVP to calculate HVPG when the difference between proximal FHVP (obtained at 2 cm from the hepatic vein outlet) and IVC (measured at the level of the hepatic ostium) is >2 mm Hg. However, there are no data supporting this recommendation. The main aim of the study was to establish which gradient, WHVP-FHVP (HVPG-Free) or WHVP-IVC (HVPG-IVC), better correlates with orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT)-free survival. This work was a retrospective evaluation of hepatic hemodynamic studies of 380 consecutive patients with cirrhosis performed from January 2006 to December 2012 with follow-up until December 2013. Patients had a mean age of 56±10 years and 64.7% were men. Mean Child-Pugh was 7±2. HVPG-Free (16±5 mm Hg) was significantly lower than HVPG-IVC (17±5.5 mm Hg; P<0.001). During a mean follow-up of 43 months, 40 patients were transplanted and 111 died. A total of 285 (75%) patients had an FHVP-IVC difference within ±2 mm Hg (no discrepancy) and 95 (25%) patients<-2 mm Hg or >2 mm Hg (discrepancy). In patients without discrepancy, 16 mm Hg was the best cut-off value predicting survival, independently of being calculated as HVPG-Free or HVPG-IVC. However, in those patients with discrepancy, 16 mm Hg was still the best cut-off value for HVPG-Free, but not for HVPG-IVC, among which 25 patients (26%) were misclassified regarding their risk of OLT/death.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that WHVP-FHVP was more accurate in assessing prognosis than WHVP-IVC, HVPG should be calculated as the gradient between WHVP and FHVP, but not with IVC, in order to optimize its prognostic value and in identifying different risk population.

Three months of simvastatin therapy vs. placebo for severe portal hypertension in cirrhosis: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Pleiotropic effects of statins decrease intrahepatic resistance and portal hypertension.

AIM

We evaluated the effects of simvastatin on hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and azygos vein blood flow in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

A 3-month prospective, randomized, triple-blind trial with simvastatin (40 mg/day) vs. placebo was conducted in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension. HVPG and azygos blood flow, measured by colour Doppler endoscopic ultrasound, were assessed before and after treatment. The primary endpoint was a decrease in the HVPG of at least 20% from baseline or to ≤12 mmHg after the treatment.

RESULTS

34 patients were prospectively enrolled, and 24 completed the protocol. In the simvastatin group 6/11 patients (55%) presented a clinically relevant decrease in the HVPG; no decrease was observed in the placebo group (p=0.036). Patients with medium/large oesophageal varices and previous variceal bleeding had a higher response rate to simvastatin. HVPG and azygos blood flow values were not correlated. No significant adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Simvastatin lowers portal pressure and may even improve liver function. The haemodynamic effect appears to be more evident in patients with severe portal hypertension.

Circulating Elastin Fragments Are Not Affected by Hepatic, Renal and Hemodynamic Changes, But Reflect Survival in Cirrhosis with TIPS

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Progressive fibrosis increases hepatic resistance and causes portal hypertension with complications. During progressive fibrosis remodeling and deposition of collagens and elastin occur. Elastin remodeling is crucially involved in fibrosis progression in animal models and human data. This study investigated the association of circulating elastin with the clinical outcome in cirrhotic patients with severe portal hypertension receiving transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt (TIPS).

METHODS

We analyzed portal and hepatic venous samples of 110 cirrhotic patients obtained at TIPS insertion and 2 weeks later. The circulating levels of elastin fragments (ELM) were determined using specific monoclonal ELISA. The relationship of ELM with clinical short-time follow-up and long-term outcome was investigated.

RESULTS

Circulating levels of ELM showed a gradient across the liver before TIPS with higher levels in the hepatic vein. Interestingly, the circulating ELM levels remained unchanged after TIPS. The circulating levels of ELM in portal and hepatic veins correlated with platelet counts and inversely with serum sodium. Hepatic venous levels of ELM were higher in CHILD C compared to CHILD A and B and were associated with the presence of ascites. Patients with high levels of ELM in the hepatic veins before TIPS showed poorer survival. In multivariate analysis ELM levels in the hepatic veins and MELD were independent predictors of mortality in these patients.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that circulating levels of ELM are not associated with hemodynamic changes, but might reflect fibrosis remodeling and predict survival in patients with severe portal hypertension receiving TIPS independently of MELD.

HCV targeting of patients with cirrhosis

Interferon (IFN)-free treatments are now the treatment of choice for patients with chronic hepatitis C. Previously difficult to treat patients by IFN-containing treatments can now be treated safely by IFN-free therapies. More than 90% of hepatitis C genotype 1 and 4 patients with compensated cirrhosis or after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can be cured by sofosbuvir combined with simeprevir, daclatasvir or ledipasvir, or by the paritaprevir/ritona-vir/ombitasvir/±dasabuvir (3D) combination. Addition of ribavirin confers to a minimal, if any, benefit to increase SVR. The need for ribavirin is controversial and remains to be studied. The optimal length of treatment is still unknown, and an individual approach may be needed. Most patients require only 12weeks of therapy. The safety of these drugs is not fully explored in patients with decompensated cirrhosis (Child-Pugh C), who should not be treated with protease inhibitors. In cirrhosis hepatitis C virus eradication does not necessarily mean a cure of the disease and patients regularly require follow-up. Drug-drug interactions with immunosuppressant in patients after OLT are easier to manage but still require attention. Better drugs are needed for genotype 3 patients.

Prevention of Rebleeding From Esophageal Varices in Patients With Cirrhosis Receiving Small-Diameter Stents Versus Hemodynamically Controlled Medical Therapy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Patients with cirrhosis and variceal hemorrhage have a high risk of rebleeding. We performed a prospective randomized trial to compare the prevention of rebleeding in patients given a small-diameter covered stent vs those given hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG)-based medical therapy prophylaxis.

METHODS

We performed an open-label study of patients with cirrhosis (92% Child class A or B, 70% alcoholic) treated at 10 medical centers in Germany. Patients were assigned randomly more than 5 days after variceal hemorrhage to groups given a small covered transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent-shunt (TIPS) (8 mm; n = 90), or medical reduction of portal pressure (propranolol and isosorbide-5-mononitrate; n = 95). HVPG was determined at the time patients were assigned to groups (baseline) and 2 weeks later. In the medical group, patients with an adequate reduction in HVPG (responders) remained on the drugs whereas nonresponders underwent only variceal band ligation. The study was closed 10 months after the last patient was assigned to a group. The primary end point was variceal rebleeding. Survival, safety (adverse events), and quality of life (based on the Short Form-36 health survey) were secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

A significantly smaller proportion of patients in the TIPS group had rebleeding within 2 years (7%) than in the medical group (26%) (P = .002). A slightly higher proportion of patients in the TIPS group experienced adverse events, including encephalopathy (18% vs 8% for medical treatment; P = .05). Rebleeding occurred in 6 of 23 patients (26%) receiving medical treatment before hemodynamic control was possible. Per-protocol analysis showed that rebleeding occurred in a smaller proportion of the 32 responders (18%) than in nonresponders who received variceal band ligation (31%) (P = .06). Fifteen patients from the medical group (16%) underwent TIPS placement during follow-up evaluation, mainly for refractory ascites. Survival time and quality of life did not differ between both randomized groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a small-diameter, covered TIPS was straightforward and prevented variceal rebleeding in patients with Child A or B cirrhosis more effectively than drugs, which often required step-by-step therapy. However, TIPS did not increase survival time or quality of life and produced slightly more adverse events. Clinical Trial no: ISRCTN 16334693.

Interferon-free regimens for chronic hepatitis C overcome the effects of portal hypertension on virological responses

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension is the strongest predictor of virological response to pegylated interferon (IFN)/ribavirin in patients with chronic hepatitis C (CHC)-related cirrhosis.

AIM

To investigate the effects of portal pressure assessed by hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement on virological responses in patients treated with IFN-free regimens outside of clinical trials.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients with CHC and cirrhosis who underwent HVPG measurement before starting an IFN-free therapy were retrospectively studied. Patients were treated with sofosbuvir in combination with daclatasvir (n = 32), ribavirin (n = 12) or simeprevir (n = 11), or the combination of simeprevir/daclatasvir (n = 1), for 12-24 weeks.

RESULTS

Hepatic venous pressure gradient values ≥10 mmHg and ≥16 mmHg were observed in 41 (73%) and 31 (55%) patients respectively. The distributions of treatment regimens and durations were comparable between patients with or without portal hypertension. Patients with portal hypertension had lower platelet counts and albumin levels, while bilirubin levels, INR, MELD and Child-Pugh scores were higher than in patients without portal hypertension. Importantly, rates of on-treatment virological response and viral kinetics, as well as the rates of sustained virological response 12 weeks after the end of therapy [96% (54/56)] were not affected by portal hypertension. Anti-viral therapy improved liver stiffness, platelet count, serum albumin and bilirubin levels, as well as prothrombin time.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to demonstrate that IFN-free regimens overcome the negative effect of portal hypertension on virological responses and viral kinetics. Improvements in liver stiffness and platelet count might reflect an anti-portal hypertensive effect of IFN-free treatments.

Spontaneous bleeding or thrombosis in cirrhosis: What should be feared the most?

The more modern and accurate concept of a rebalanced hemostatic status in cirrhosis is slowly replacing the traditional belief of patients with cirrhosis being "auto-anticoagulated", prone only to bleeding complications, and protected from thrombotic events. With greater attention to clinical thrombotic events, their impact on the natural history of cirrhosis, and with the emergence and increased use of point-of-care and global assays, it is now understood that cirrhosis results in profound hemostatic alterations that can lead to thrombosis as well as to bleeding complications. Although many clinical decisions are still based on traditional coagulation parameters such as prothrombin (PT), PT, and international normalized ratio, it is increasingly recognized that these tests do not adequately predict the risk of bleeding, nor they should guide pre-emptive interventions. Moreover, altered coagulation tests should not be considered as a contraindication to the use of anticoagulation, although this therapeutic or prophylactic approach is not at present routinely undertaken. Gastroesophageal variceal bleeding continues to be one of the most feared and deadly complications of cirrhosis and portal hypertension, but great progresses have been made in prevention and treatment strategies. Other bleeding sites that are frequently part of end-stage liver disease are similar to clinical manifestations of thrombocytopenia, with gum bleeding and epistaxis being very common but fortunately only rarely a cause of life-threatening bleeding. On the contrary, manifestations of coagulation factor deficiencies like soft tissue bleeding and hemartrosis are rare in patients with cirrhosis. As far as thrombotic complications are concerned, portal vein thrombosis is the most common event in patients with cirrhosis, but venous thromboembolism is not infrequent, and results in important morbidity and mortality in patients with cirrhosis, especially those with decompensated disease. Future studies and the more widespread use of point-of-care tests in evaluating hemostasis will aid the clinician in decision making when facing the patient with bleeding or with thrombotic complications, with both ends of a continuum being potentially fatal.

Clinical Evaluation and Prognosis

BACKGROUND

Liver cirrhosis is no longer considered a homogeneous disease, with two different phases now identified: 'compensated' and 'decompensated' cirrhosis, in which complications of cirrhosis characterize the latter. Within each phase, different stages and predictors should be recognized in order to correctly stratify the prognosis and individualize possible therapeutic options. Key Messages: In compensated cirrhosis the presence of clinically significant portal hypertension [CSPH = hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥10 mm Hg] constitutes the most important independent predictor of several relevant clinical endpoints (formation of esophageal varices; first clinical decompensation). An optimal HVPG response to medical therapy of portal hypertension (HVPG reduction <12 mm Hg or ≥20% vs. the pretreatment value, responders) has been consistently linked to a decrease in the risk of variceal bleeding both in primary and secondary prophylaxis, and to a decrease in the risk of presenting other clinical decompensating events. Furthermore, in patients undergoing secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, being an HVPG responder is associated with an improved survival. HVPG also maintains an independent prognostic value in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Noninvasive alternatives to HVPG for the prediction of CSPH have been investigated; liver stiffness by transient elastography and the combination of liver stiffness, spleen size by ultrasound and platelet count are currently the best methods to noninvasively diagnose CSPH, with an accuracy of about 90%. Additional factors modulate prognosis in cirrhosis. Liver function (albumin, bilirubin, INR) is independently associated with prognosis both in compensated and decompensated cirrhosis, and in the latter phase renal function also plays a central role. Among clinical cofactors, obesity and diabetes are emerging as variables increasing the risk of progression to decompensation and death in cirrhosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Prognostic stratification in patients with cirrhosis should take into account a complex interplay of several clinical, hemodynamic and biological variables. The present review summarizes the existing evidence regarding prognostic factors in cirrhosis, with particular emphasis on compensated cirrhosis.

The Role of Medical Therapy for Variceal Bleeding

Acute variceal hemorrhage (AVH) is a lethal complication of portal hypertension and should be suspected in every patient with liver cirrhosis who presents with upper gastrointestinal bleed. AVH-related mortality has decreased in the last few decades from 40% to 15%-20% due to advances in the general and specific management of variceal hemorrhage. This review summarizes current management of AVH and prevention of recurrent hemorrhage with a focus on pharmacologic therapy.

Effects of Sapropterin on Portal and Systemic Hemodynamics in Patients With Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension: A Bicentric Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVES

Tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4), a cofactor of nitric oxide synthase, might have a role in the treatment of portal hypertension (PHT) as its administration improves endothelial nitric oxide generation and hepatic endothelial dysfunction, and reduces portal pressure in experimental models of cirrhosis. Sapropterin is an oral synthetic analogue of BH4 recently approved for the treatment of phenylketonuria. This study evaluated the safety and effects of sapropterin on hepatic and systemic hemodynamics in patients with cirrhosis and PHT.

METHODS

Forty patients with cirrhosis and PHT (hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) ≥10 mm Hg) were randomly allocated to receive sapropterin (n=19) for 2 weeks (5 mg/kg/day increased to 10 at day 8) or placebo (n=21) in a double-blind multicenter clinical trial. Randomization was stratified according to concomitant treatment with β-adrenergic blockers. We studied at baseline and post-treatment splanchnic (HVPG and hepatic blood flow (HBF)) and systemic hemodynamics, endothelial dysfunction and oxidative stress markers (von Willebrand factor and malondialdehyde), liver function tests, and safety variables.

RESULTS

HVPG was not modified by either sapropterin (16.0±4.4 vs. 15.8±4.7 mm Hg) or placebo (16.0±4.6 vs. 15.5±4.9 mm Hg). HBF, systemic hemodynamics, endothelial dysfunction markers, and liver function tests remained unchanged. Sapropterin was well tolerated (no patient required dose adjustment or withdrawal), and adverse events were mild and similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Sapropterin, an oral synthetic analogue of BH4, at the used dose did not reduce portal pressure in patients with cirrhosis. Sapropterin was safe and no serious adverse effects or deleterious systemic hemodynamic effects were observed.

Presentation and complications associated with cirrhosis of the liver

OBJECTIVE

To provide an understanding of the detrimental impact of cirrhosis and its complications, strengths and weaknesses of current treatment options for the management of these complications, and new developments in this rapidly changing field.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Relevant publications were identified via PubMed and Cochrane databases, with additional references obtained by reviewing bibliographies from selected articles.

RESULTS

Cirrhosis, a progressive liver disease, is characterized by fibrosis caused by chronic liver injury. Liver fibrosis impairs hepatic function and causes structural changes that result in portal hypertension. Most patients with cirrhosis remain asymptomatic until they develop decompensated cirrhosis. At this stage, patients experience complications associated with portal hypertension (i.e., the abnormal increase in portal vein pressure), including ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatic encephalopathy (HE), hepatorenal syndrome, portopulmonary hypertension, or variceal bleeding. In addition, intestinal microbial translocation in patients with cirrhosis might also cause SBP and HE. Because the survival rate for patients with cirrhosis substantially decreases once complications develop, the key goals in treating patients with cirrhosis include both managing the underlying liver disease and preventing and treating related complications. In patients with compensated cirrhosis, the management strategy is to prevent variceal bleeding and other complications that can lead to decompensated cirrhosis. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis are typically referred for liver transplantation, and the main focus of pre-transplant management is to eliminate the cause of cirrhosis (e.g., excess alcohol consumption, hepatitis virus) and prevent the recurrence of each decompensating complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Although substantial progress has been made to prevent the complications and mortality associated with cirrhosis, liver transplantation in combination with resolution of the etiology of cirrhosis remains the only curative option for most patients. Emerging therapies such as anti-fibrotic agents hold promise in potentially halting or reversing the progression of cirrhosis, even in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.

Achieving sustained virological response: what's the impact on further hepatitis C virus-related disease?

Continuous hepatic inflammation as a result of chronic infection with the hepatitis C virus may lead to the development of fibrosis and eventually cirrhosis. At the stage of cirrhosis, patients are at elevated risk of liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma, two complications that shorten their life expectancy. Survival may be further impaired by the extra-hepatic manifestations of chronic hepatitis C virus infection, such as diabetes mellitus and lymphoma. Sustained virological response (SVR) following antiviral therapy has been associated with regression of hepatic fibrosis as well as with a reduction in portal pressure, both important markers of liver disease severity. Long-term follow-up studies indicated that SVR was related not only to a reduced occurrence of solid clinical end points, including liver failure and hepatocellular carcinoma, but also cardiovascular events and malignant lymphomas. Together, these findings may explain the recently observed improved overall survival among patients who attained SVR, even in the case of advanced liver disease.

Evolution in the understanding of the pathophysiological basis of portal hypertension: How changes in paradigm are leading to successful new treatments

Among the common complication of cirrhosis portal hypertension witnessed a major improvement of prognosis during the past decades. Principally due to the introduction of rational treatments based on new pathophysiological paradigms (concepts of thought) developed in the 1980s. The best example being the use of non-selective beta-blockers and of vasopressin analogs, somatostatin, and its analogs. Further refinement in the knowledge of the molecular mechanisms involved in the regulation of both the splanchnic and hepatic circulation has led to the emergence of new treatments, which are based on evidence that show not only structural but also vasoactive components increase the hepatic vascular resistance, as well as of angiogenesis. This knowledge and future improvements will most likely result in more effective treatment of portal hypertension and effective prevention of its complications in early stages.

Staging of liver fibrosis or cirrhosis: The role of hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement

Liver fibrosis is a common histological change of chronic liver injury and it is closely related with portal hypertension which is hemodynamic complication of chronic liver disease. Currently, liver fibrosis has been known as a reversible dynamic process in previous literatures. Although liver biopsy is a gold standard for assessing the stage of liver fibrosis, it may not completely represent the stage of liver fibrosis because of sampling error or semi-quantative measurement. Recent evidences suggested that histologic, clinical, hemodynamic, and biologic features are closely associated in patients with chronic liver disease. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement has been known as a modality to evaluate the portal pressure. The HVPG measurement has been used clinically for fibrosis diagnosis, risk stratification, preoperative screening for liver resection, monitoring the efficacy of medical treatments, and assessing the prognosis of liver fibrosis. Therefore, the HVPG measurement can be used to monitor areas the chronic liver disease but also other important areas of chronic liver disease.

[A case of spontaneous bleeding of multiple lumbar arteries in a patient with liver cirrhosis]

Esophageal and gastric varix, portal hypertensive gastropathy, Mallory-Weiss tear and gastric ulcer are common causes of bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. However, spontaneous arterial bleeding without a history of trauma is a rare cause of bleeding which can be fatal. We report a case of a 55-year-old woman with alcoholic liver cirrhosis who developed spontaneous bleeding of multiple right lumbar arteries and died in spite of repetitive transfusion and embolization.

Severe portal hypertension in cirrhosis: evaluation of perfusion parameters with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) and Doppler ultrasonography (DUS) in the diagnosis of severe portal hypertension (PH) in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC).

METHODS

Patients with PH scheduled to receive hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement were recruited for this study. Hepatic DUS and CEUS were performed successively. Several Doppler and CEUS parameters were explored for correlation with HVPG values and their association with severe PH (≥ 12 mmHg of HVPG). Comparison of the parameters between the severe and non-severe PH groups and their correlation with HVPG values was evaluated. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was also performed to investigate the performance in order to diagnose severe PH.

RESULTS

Fifty-three consecutive patients were enrolled in this study. Among them, 43 patients did not have significant ascites. Compared with the non-severe PH group, portal venous velocity and intrahepatic transit time (ITT) were significantly reduced in the severe PH group (all p<0.05). Difference between inspiratory and expiratory hepatic venous damping indices (ΔHVDI), hepatic venous arrival time (HVAT) and ITT moderately correlated with HVPG (r = -0.358, -0.338, and -0.613, respectively). Areas under the curves for severe PH were 0.94 of ITT and 0.72 of HVAT, respectively (all p<0.05). ITT under 6 seconds indicated severe PH with a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 89%.

CONCLUSIONS

Hepatic CEUS may be more useful in estimating the HVPG value and determining the presence of severe PH compared to DUS, and ITT was the most accurate parameter to diagnose severe PH.

A new model combining the liver/spleen volume ratio and classification of varices predicts HVPG in hepatitis B patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Although the therapy of varices in liver cirrhosis has improved, the mortality during a variceal hemorrhage episode remains high. Patients with hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) greater than 12 mmHg have been identified as being at a higher risk for the first hemorrhage episode.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to find an accurate method to predict HVPG greater than 12 mmHg.

METHODS

A total of 150 hepatitis B patients with liver cirrhosis were enrolled and analyzed retrospectively. The patients were randomly divided into the experiment group and the validation group. The experiment group was used to construct a model to predict HVPG greater than 12 mmHg. The validation group was used to verify the predictive equation.

RESULTS

The predictive model combined with the liver/spleen volume ratio and classification of varices was constructed to predict HVPG greater than 12 mmHg. The area under the curve of this predictive equation was 0.919. The values of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 92.9, 87.0, 89.7, and 90.9%, respectively. The following equation was used to calculate the HVPG score: HVPG score = 13.651 - 6.187×ln (liver/spleen volume)+2.755×[classification of varices score (classification of varices : small, 1; large; 2].

CONCLUSION

The new model combining the liver/spleen volume ratio and classification of varices can accurately predict HVPG in hepatitis B patients with cirrhosis.

The phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitor udenafil lowers portal pressure in compensated preascitic liver cirrhosis. A dose-finding phase-II-study

BACKGROUND

Phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitors may lower portal pressure.

AIMS

To investigate the effect of the phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitor udenafil on hepatic and systemic haemodynamics in liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

In an open-label phase-II-study, patients with liver cirrhosis Child A/B and hepatic venous pressure-gradient ≥ 12 mmHg received 12.5mg/day, 25mg/day, 50mg/day, 75 mg/day (n = 5, each), or 100mg/day (n = 10) udenafil p.o. for one week. On days 0 and 6, hepatic venous pressure-gradient was measured prior to and one hour after drug ingestion. Endpoints were reduction of hepatic venous pressure-gradient from day 0 pre to day 6 post intake and reduction in the acute setting. Pharmacokinetics were measured in the two lowest dosage groups.

RESULTS

Combining the 75 and 100mg/day groups hepatic venous pressure-gradient reduction after drug intake was 19.9% (p = 0.0006) on day 0. From day 0 pre-dose to day 6 post-dose hepatic venous pressure-gradient decreased by 15.7% (p = 0.040) and in 5/15 patients by ≥ 20% or to <12 mmHg. In the 100mg/day group, mean arterial pressure decreased from 98.9 mmHg by 6.2 mmHg (p = 0.037) from day 0 pre-dose to day 6 post-dose. Heart rates or electrocardiograms were unchanged. Udenafil was eliminated with t1/2 = 25 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral application of 75-100mg of the phosphodiesterase-5-inhibitor udenafil lowers portal pressure in the acute setting by about 20% without relevant systemic cardiovascular side effects.