Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Terlipressin and Albumin with a Combination of Concurrent Dopamine, Furosemide, and Albumin in Hepatorenal Syndrome

Comparative Mortality Rates of Vasoconstrictor Agents in the Management of Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is an acute complication of advanced liver disease, which manifests with a rapidly progressive decline in kidney function. Though pharmacological treatment has been recently advanced, there are still high mortality rates. The study compares the mortality rate in patients using different vasoconstrictor agents in the management of HRS. A complete literature search was done in the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, PubMed Central (PMC), and Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). Studies were included according to previously established criteria, in which all studies reporting on adult patients with HRS treated with vasoconstrictor agents were eligible. The data extracted were analyzed with a random-effects model to express variability between studies, and the principal measure was the risk ratio (RR) for mortality. Of the 8,137 studies identified, 29 met the inclusion criteria. In the meta-analysis, vasoconstrictors, mainly terlipressin, significantly improved renal function and decreased the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) versus placebo. However, a significant impact on mortality was lacking (0.94 (0.84-1.06), p = 0.31). The subgroup analysis found that mortality rates were not significantly different between vasoconstrictors, whether used in combination with or without albumin (0.97 (0.77-1.23), p = 0.79, and 0.98 (0.79-1.21), p = 0.86). Global heterogeneity was low, indicating consistent results in the studies. Vasoconstrictors are helpful in managing HRS, with improvement in renal function and reduction in RRT requirements. However, the effect on mortality was small and nonsignificant. Such findings support the use of terlipressin in HRS management; concomitantly, they emphasize the need for personalized treatment strategies and future research to find alternative therapies that may be more effective for improved survival results with fewer side effects.

Management of hepatorenal syndrome and associated outcomes: a systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), a multiorgan condition of acute kidney injury, is seen in advanced liver disease. This study aims to evaluate the current treatment for HRS.

METHODS

The authors searched PubMed, Scopus and Google Scholar literature. After quality assessment, 31 studies were included in this review. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses methodology and the population, intervention, comparison and outcome scheme were used. We included human-controlled trials that evaluate the current treatment for HRS. Two authors independently screened articles for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the quality of included studies.

RESULTS

This study investigated the studies conducted on the effects of different treatments on follow-up of HRS patients. We gathered 440 articles, so 31 articles remained in our study. Of which 24 articles were conducted on terlipressin versus placebo or other treatments (midodrine/octreotide, norepinephrine, etc) that showed the higher rate of HRS reversal was detected for terlipressin in 17 studies (10 of them were significant), 2 studies achieved an insignificant lower rate of the model for end-stage liver disease score for terlipressin, 15 studies showed a decreased mortality rate in the terlipressin group (4 of them were significant).

CONCLUSION

This review showed that terlipressin has a significantly higher reversal rate of HRS than the other treatments. Even the results showed that terlipressin is more efficient than midodrine/octreotide and norepinephrine as a previous medication, in reverse HRS, increasing patient survival.

The Comparative Effectiveness of Vasoactive Treatments for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Evidence examining commonly used drug treatments remains uncertain. We assessed the comparative effectiveness of inpatient treatments for HRS by performing a network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Pairs of reviewers independently identified eligible RCTs that enrolled patients with type 1 or 2 HRS. Pairs of reviewers independently extracted data.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for RCTs and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations approach. Our main outcomes are all-cause mortality, HRS reversal, and serious adverse events. Of 3,079 citations, we included 26 RCTs examining 1,736 patients. Based on pooled analysis, terlipressin increases HRS reversal compared with placebo (142 reversals per 1,000 [95% CI, >87.7 to >210.9]; high certainty). Norepinephrine (112.7 reversals per 1,000 [95% CI, 52.6 to >192.3]) may increase HRS reversal compared with placebo (low certainty). The effect of midodrine+octreotide (67.8 reversals per 1,000 [95% CI, <2.8 to >177.4]; very low) on HRS reversal is uncertain. Terlipressin may reduce mortality compared with placebo (93.7 fewer deaths [95% CI, 168.7 to <12.5]; low certainty). Terlipressin probably increases the risk of serious adverse events compared with placebo (20.4 more events per 1,000 [95% CI, <5.1 to >51]; moderate certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin increases HRS reversal compared with placebo. Terlipressin may reduce mortality. Until access to terlipressin improves, initial norepinephrine administration may be more appropriate than initial trial with midodrine+octreotide. Our review has the potential to inform future guideline and practice in the treatment of HRS.

Practice guidance for the use of terlipressin for liver cirrhosis-related complications

BACKGROUND

Liver cirrhosis is a major global health burden worldwide due to its high risk of morbidity and mortality. Role of terlipressin for the management of liver cirrhosis-related complications has been recognized during recent years. This article aims to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidance on the use of terlipressin for liver cirrhosis-related complications.

METHODS

Hepatobiliary Study Group of the Chinese Society of Gastroenterology of the Chinese Medical Association and Hepatology Committee of the Chinese Research Hospital Association have invited gastroenterologists, hepatologists, infectious disease specialists, surgeons, and clinical pharmacists to formulate the clinical practice guidance based on comprehensive literature review and experts' clinical experiences.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 major guidance statements regarding efficacy and safety of terlipressin in liver cirrhosis were proposed. Terlipressin can be beneficial for the management of cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). However, the evidence regarding the use of terlipressin in cirrhotic patients with ascites, post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction, and bacterial infections and in those undergoing hepatic resection and liver transplantation remains insufficient. Terlipressin-related adverse events, mainly including gastrointestinal symptoms, electrolyte disturbance, and cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events, should be closely monitored.

CONCLUSION

The current clinical practice guidance supports the use of terlipressin for gastroesophageal variceal bleeding and HRS in liver cirrhosis. High-quality studies are needed to further clarify its potential effects in other liver cirrhosis-related complications.

Hepatorenal Syndrome: Definitions, Diagnosis, and Management

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a hemodynamically driven process mediated by renal dysregulation and inflammatory response. Albumin, antibiotics, and β-blockers are among therapies that have been studied in HRS prevention. There are no Food and Drug Administration-approved treatments for HRS although multiple liver societies have recommended terlipressin as first-line pharmacotherapy. Renal replacement therapy is the primary modality used to bridge to definitive therapy with orthotopic liver transplant or simultaneous liver-kidney transplant. Advances in our understanding of HRS pathophysiology and emerging therapeutic modalities are needed to change outcomes for this vulnerable population.

Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1: From Diagnosis Ascertainment to Goal-Oriented Pharmacologic Therapy

Hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1) is a serious form of AKI that affects individuals with advanced cirrhosis with ascites. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is essential for effective implementation of therapeutic measures that can favorably alter its clinical course. Despite decades of investigation, HRS-1 continues to be primarily a diagnosis of exclusion. Although the diagnostic criteria dictated by the International Club of Ascites provide a useful framework to approach the diagnosis of HRS-1, they do not fully reflect the complexity of clinical scenarios that is often encountered in patients with cirrhosis and AKI. Thus, diagnostic uncertainty is often faced. In particular, the distinction between HRS-1 and acute tubular injury is challenging with the currently available clinical tools. Because treatment of HRS-1 differs from that of acute tubular injury, distinguishing these two causes of AKI has direct implications in management. Therefore, the use of the International Club of Ascites criteria should be enhanced with a more individualized approach and attention to the other phenotypic aspects of HRS-1 and other types of AKI. Liver transplantation is the most effective treatment for HRS-1, but it is only available to a small fraction of the affected patients worldwide. Thus, pharmacologic therapy is necessary. Vasoconstrictors aimed to increase mean arterial pressure constitute the most effective approach. Administration of intravenous albumin is an established co-adjuvant therapy. However, the risk for fluid overload in patients with cirrhosis with AKI is not negligible, and interventions intended to expand or remove volume should be tailored to the specific needs of the patient. Norepinephrine and terlipressin are the most effective vasoconstrictors, and their use should be determined by availability, ease of administration, and attention to optimal risk-benefit balance for each clinical scenario.

Overview of Complications in Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Cirrhosis is the outcome of chronic liver disease of any etiology due to progressive liver injury and fibrosis. Consequently, cirrhosis leads to portal hypertension and liver dysfunction, progressing to complications like ascites, variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatopulmonary syndrome, cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, sarcopenia, hepatocellular carcinoma, and coagulation disorders. End-stage liver disease leads to an impaired quality of life, loss of social and economic productivity, and reduced survival.

METHODS

This narrative review explains the pathophysiology of complications of cirrhosis, the diagnostic approach and innovative management, with focus on data from India. A comprehensive literature search of the published data was performed in regard with the spectrum, diagnosis, and management of cirrhosis and its complications.

RESULTS

There is a change in the epidemiology of metabolic syndrome, lifestyle diseases, alcohol consumption and the spectrum of etiological diagnosis in patients with cirrhosis. With the advent of universal vaccination and efficacious long-term viral suppression agents for chronic hepatitis B, availability of direct-acting antiviral agents for chronic hepatitis C, and a booming liver transplantation programme across the country, the management of complications is essential. There are several updates in the standard of care in the management of complications of cirrhosis, such as hepatorenal syndrome, hepatocellular carcinoma, and hepatic encephalopathy, and new therapies that address supportive and palliative care in advanced cirrhosis.

CONCLUSION

Prevention, early diagnosis, appropriate management of complications, timely transplantation are cornerstones in the management protocol of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. India needs improved access to care, outreach of public health programmes for viral hepatitis care, health infrastructure, and disease registries for improved healthcare outcomes. Low-cost initiatives like immunization, alcohol cessation, awareness about liver diseases, viral hepatitis elimination, and patient focused decision-making algorithms are essential to manage liver disease in India.

Hepatorenal syndrome in acute-on-chronic liver failure with acute kidney injury: more questions requiring discussion

In cirrhosis with ascites, hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a specific prerenal dysfunction unresponsive to fluid volume expansion. Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) comprises a group of clinical syndromes with multiple organ failure and early high mortality. There are differences in the characterization of ACLF between the Eastern and Western medical communities. Patients with ACLF and acute kidney injury (AKI) have more structural injuries, contributing to confusion in diagnosing HRS-AKI. In this review, we discuss progress in the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management of HRS-AKI, especially in patients with ACLF. Controversy regarding HRS-AKI in ACLF and acute liver failure, hepatic carcinoma, shock, sepsis, and chronic kidney disease is also discussed. Research on the treatment of HRS-AKI with ACLF needs to be more actively pursued to improve disease prognosis.

Hepatorenal syndrome: pathophysiology and evidence-based management update

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a functional renal failure that develops in patients with advanced hepatic cirrhosis with ascites and in those with fulminant hepatic failure. The prevalence of HRS varies among studies but in general it is the third most common cause of acute kidney injury (AKI) in cirrhotic patients after pre-renal azotemia and acute tubular necrosis. HRS carries a grim prognosis with a mortality rate approaching 90% three months after disease diagnosis. Fortunately, different strategies have been proven to be successful in preventing HRS. Although treatment options are available, they are not universally effective in restoring renal function but they might prolong survival long enough for liver transplantation, which is the ultimate treatment. Much has been learned in the last two decades regarding the pathophysiology and management of this disease which lead to notable evolution in the HRS definition and better understanding on how best to manage HRS patients. In the current review, we will summarize the recent advancement in epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of HRS.

Norepinephrine is More Effective Than Midodrine/Octreotide in Patients With Hepatorenal Syndrome-Acute Kidney Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Terlipressin is the first-line pharmacological treatment for hepatorenal syndrome. When terlipressin is unavailable, midodrine/octreotide or norepinephrine, with albumin, represent the alternative treatments. The comparative efficacy of these alternative regimens remains unclear. Objective: To compare the efficacy of midodrine/octreotide to that of norepinephrine for the treatment of patients with hepatorenal syndrome. Methods: In the intensive care setting, sixty patients with hepatorenal syndrome were randomized to initially receive either 0.5 mg/h of norepinephrine (maximum 3 mg/h) or 5 mg of oral midodrine three times/day (maximum 12.5 mg three times/day) plus octreotide (100 μg/6 h) as subcutaneous injection (maximum 200 μg/6 h), together with albumin (20-40 g/day). Treatment was allowed for a maximum of 10 days. Survival was analyzed for up to 30 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved full response, defined as the return of serum creatinine to a value within 0.3 mg/dl of the baseline at the end of treatment. Results: There was a significantly higher rate of full response in the norepinephrine group (15/26, 57.60%) than the midodrine/octreotide group (5/25, 20%) (p = 0.006). Eleven (42.30%) patients in the norepinephrine group and 6 (24%) in the midodrine/octreotide group survived (p = 0.166). Conclusion: Norepinephrine plus albumin is significantly more effective than midodrine and octreotide plus albumin in improving renal function in patients with hepatorenal syndrome. (ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03455322). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03455322?cond = Hepatorenal+Syndrome&cntry = EG&draw = 2&rank = 1.

INASL-ISN Joint Position Statements on Management of Patients with Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Disease

Renal dysfunction is very common among patients with chronic liver disease, and concomitant liver disease can occur among patients with chronic kidney disease. The spectrum of clinical presentation and underlying etiology is wide when concomitant kidney and liver disease occur in the same patient. Management of these patients with dual onslaught is challenging and requires a team approach of hepatologists and nephrologists. No recent guidelines exist on algorithmic approach toward diagnosis and management of these challenging patients. The Indian National Association for Study of Liver (INASL) in association with Indian Society of Nephrology (ISN) endeavored to develop joint guidelines on diagnosis and management of patients who have simultaneous liver and kidney disease. For generating these guidelines, an INASL-ISN Taskforce was constituted, which had members from both the societies. The taskforce first identified contentious issues on various aspects of simultaneous liver and kidney diseases, which were allotted to individual members of the taskforce who reviewed them in detail. A round-table meeting of the Taskforce was held on 20-21 October 2018 at New Delhi to discuss, debate, and finalize the consensus statements. The evidence and recommendations in these guidelines have been graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system with minor modifications. The strength of recommendations (strong and weak) thus reflects the quality (grade) of underlying evidence (I, II, III). We present here the INASL-ISN Joint Position Statements on Management of Patients with Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Disease.

Limited Progress in Hepatorenal Syndrome (HRS) Reversal and Survival 2002-2018: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a fatal complication of cirrhosis. Treatments trend toward HRS reversal, but few show clear mortality benefit. We sought to quantify the progress-or lack thereof-in improving outcomes of type 1 HRS over time.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing type 1 HRS outcomes including (a) overall survival (liver transplant-free survival if reported) and (b) HRS reversal. Each study arm was analyzed separately to look at changes in outcomes over time. RCTs published comparing medical treatments for type 1 HRS were searched using several databases through July 31, 2019.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs (28 arms) involving 778 participants enrolled between 2002 and 2018 were included. Twelve RCTs measured HRS reversal. In conjunction with albumin (or plasma expander), the most common medications used were terlipressin (13 arms), antibiotics (7), norepinephrine (6), dopamine (4), and midodrine/octreotide (3). Pooled survival rate was 34.6% (95% CI 26.4-43.8), and pooled HRS reversal rate was 42.8% (95% CI 34.2-51.9). Regression analyzing the incremental effect of the year the RCT was initiated showed that more recent studies were not associated with improved survival (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.11, p = 0.66) or HRS reversal rates (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96-1.11, p = 0.41). There was no survival improvement when RCTs with endpoints assessed ≤ or > 1 month were analyzed separately with respective OR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.95-1.20, p = 0.26) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.85-1.12, p = 0.70).

CONCLUSION

Outcomes have not improved for patients with type 1 HRS since 2002. There is a need to improve prevention and treatment of type 1 HRS.

Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1: Current Challenges And Future Prospects

Renal dysfunction represents a dreadful complication of advanced liver cirrhosis. In addition to the traditional types of acute kidney injury (AKI) that can occur in the general population, cirrhotics might experience a different kind of renal dysfunction, called hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). The exact definition of HRS is a functional renal dysfunction caused by overactivity of the endogenous vasoactive systems (in particular intrarenal circulation) which lead to reduced renal perfusion. Type I HRS (HRS-1) is characterized by an abrupt deterioration in renal function (in less than 2 weeks), defined by a doubling of baseline sCr to >2.5 mg/dL or a 50% reduction in the initial 24 hrs creatinine clearance to <20 mL/min. Frequent precipitating events leading to HRS-1 are bacterial infections, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, or large-volume paracentesis without adequate albumin administration as well as massive diuretic use. In 2015, the international club of ascites (ICA) revised the definitions and recommendations concerning HRS. The revised definition allows to adopt effective pharmacological therapy based on albumin and vasoconstrictors in an earlier stage thus not influenced anymore by a rigid sCr cut-off value as by the previous definition of HRS-1. The aim of this article was to provide an updated overview of the latest advancements in the field of hepatorenal syndrome and of the recent amendments of the previous definitions of kidney injury in cirrhotic patients.

Treatment for hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome is defined as renal failure in people with cirrhosis in the absence of other causes. In addition to supportive treatment such as albumin to restore fluid balance, the other potential treatments include systemic vasoconstrictor drugs (such as vasopressin analogues or noradrenaline), renal vasodilator drugs (such as dopamine), transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and liver support with molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS). There is uncertainty over the best treatment regimen for hepatorenal syndrome.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trial registers until December 2018 to identify randomised clinical trials on hepatorenal syndrome in people with cirrhosis.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adults with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified eligible trials and collected data. The outcomes for this review included mortality, serious adverse events, any adverse events, resolution of hepatorenal syndrome, liver transplantation, and other decompensation events. We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, hazard ratio (HR), and mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 25 trials (1263 participants; 12 interventions) in the review. Twenty-three trials (1185 participants) were included in one or more outcomes. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and all the evidence was of low or very low certainty. The trials included participants with liver cirrhosis of varied aetiologies as well as a mixture of type I hepatorenal syndrome only, type II hepatorenal syndrome only, or people with both type I and type II hepatorenal syndrome. Participant age ranged from 42 to 60 years, and the proportion of females ranged from 5.8% to 61.5% in the trials that reported this information. The follow-up in the trials ranged from one week to six months. Overall, 59% of participants died during this period and about 35% of participants recovered from hepatorenal syndrome. The most common interventions compared were albumin plus terlipressin, albumin plus noradrenaline, and albumin alone.There was no evidence of a difference in mortality (22 trials; 1153 participants) at maximal follow-up between the different interventions. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. There was no evidence of differences in the proportion of people with serious adverse events (three trials; 428 participants), number of participants with serious adverse events per participant (two trials; 166 participants), proportion of participants with any adverse events (four trials; 402 participants), the proportion of people who underwent liver transplantation at maximal follow-up (four trials; 342 participants), or other features of decompensation at maximal follow-up (one trial; 466 participants). Five trials (293 participants) reported number of any adverse events, and five trials (219 participants) reported treatment costs. Albumin plus noradrenaline had fewer numbers of adverse events per participant (rate ratio 0.51, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.87). Eighteen trials (1047 participants) reported recovery from hepatorenal syndrome (as per definition of hepatorenal syndrome). In terms of recovery from hepatorenal syndrome, in the direct comparisons, albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide and albumin plus octreotide had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome than albumin plus terlipressin (HR 0.04; 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.25 and HR 0.26, 95% CrI 0.07 to 0.80 respectively). There was no evidence of differences between the groups in any of the other direct comparisons. In the network meta-analysis, albumin and albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome compared with albumin plus terlipressin.

FUNDING

two trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies; five trials were funded by parties who had no vested interest in the results of the trial; and 18 trials did not report the source of funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is no evidence of benefit or harm of any of the interventions for hepatorenal syndrome with regards to the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, serious adverse events (proportion), number of serious adverse events per participant, any adverse events (proportion), liver transplantation, or other decompensation events. Low-certainty evidence suggests that albumin plus noradrenaline had fewer 'any adverse events per participant' than albumin plus terlipressin. Low- or very low-certainty evidence also found that albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide and albumin alone had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome compared with albumin plus terlipressin.Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered; employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts or planned cross-overs (or perform an intention-to-treat analysis); and report clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, adverse events, and recovery from hepatorenal syndrome. Albumin plus noradrenaline and albumin plus terlipressin appear to be the interventions that should be compared in future trials.

Terlipressin for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: an overview of current evidence

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of liver cirrhosis, which is of pre-renal origin due to central volume depletion together with cardiac dysfunction and characterized by oliguria with severe urinary sodium retention and elevated serum creatinine levels. HRS is divided into HRS I, which is rapidly progressive and mostly seen in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis, and HRS II, which progresses more slowly and is always accompanied by gross ascites. Liver transplantation is the best choice of treatment for HRS but rarely available. Current mainstay pharmacological therapies are vasoconstrictors, such as terlipressin, noradrenaline and dopamine, in combination with albumin. This paper aims to overview the current evidence regarding outcomes of terlipressin for the treatment of HRS.

Noradrenaline versus terlipressin in the management of type 1 hepatorenal syndrome: A randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) occurs in decompensated liver disease and carries high mortality. Vasoconstrictors are the drug of choice. Terlipressin is widely used and is expensive. In this study, we compared noradrenaline and terlipressin in the management of type 1 HRS.

METHODS

Sixty consecutive patients with type 1 HRS were managed with noradrenaline (Group A, n = 30) or terlipressin (Group B, n = 30) with albumin in a randomized controlled trial at a tertiary center.

RESULTS

Reversal of type 1 HRS was achieved in 16 (53%) patients in group A and 17 (57%) in group B. There was statistically insignificant difference between the two groups in decreasing serum creatinine and increasing urine output (p > 0.05). On univariate analysis, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, serum sodium, serum urea, serum albumin, prothrombin time, International normalized ratio (INR), serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT), ascitic fluid protein, and history of bleeding were associated with response to treatment (noradrenaline/terlipressin). However, on multivariate analysis, only baseline CTP score, serum urea, serum albumin, and prothrombin time were independent predictors of response. All patients who responded were discharged alive with no mortality within 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no difference in outcome of patients with type 1 HRS treated with noradrenaline or terlipressin. Thus, noradrenaline, which is cheaper, can be used instead of terlipressin (Clinical Trials Registry-India [CTRI] No. CTRI/2011/09/002032).

A novel scoring model for predicting mortality risk in patients with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study aimed to create a risk scoring model for death from cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome, improve the detection rate of high-risk groups, and provide clinical evidence for early intervention treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively recruited 196 patients with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome between 1 January 2013 and 31 July 2014 at Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, China. The clinical information, biochemical values, age, and sex of the patients were included in the multivariate logistic regression model for screening independent risk factors. The model was validated in 56 patients with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome between 1 August 2014 and 31 December 2014 at Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, China.

RESULTS

The death risk prediction scoring model included the following four independent risk factors: liver cancer, neutrophil above 70%, alanine aminotransferase higher than 40 U/l, and creatinine higher than 127 mmol/l. The sum death risk score ranged from 0 to 5: 0-2 identified patients with a lower risk of death (mortality rates: 12-41.4%), whereas 3-5 identified patients with a higher risk of death (mortality rates: 48.8-80%). Receiver-operating characteristic curves were constructed for the scoring model and the areas under the curves (AUC) were compared using the z-test. The AUC of the scoring model was 0.843. In addition, the AUC of validated model in 56 patients was 0.742.

CONCLUSION

The scoring model can accurately predict mortality risk in patients with hepatorenal syndrome.

Terlipressin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome is a fatal complication of advanced cirrhosis. Terlipressin is the most widely used treatment method, however, the therapy effects remain inconsonant. We aim to systematically assess the safety and efficacy of terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials involving terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome were included in a systematic literature search. Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion and extracted the data. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the safety and efficacy of terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome.

RESULTS

A total of 18 randomized controlled trials including 1011 patients were included. Hepatorenal syndrome reverse rate was 42.0% in the terlipressin group and 26.2% in the non-terlipressin group. Terlipressin had greater hepatorenal syndrome reverse rate and renal function improvement rate than placebo and octreotide in the management of HRS. Comparing to norepinephrine, terlipressin had similar efficacy, but with more adverse events. No significant difference of the efficacy was found between terlipressin and dopamine treatment. The subgroup analysis for type 1 HRS had the above same results, except that the adverse events were not significant different between norepinephrine group and terlipressin group.

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin was superior to placebo and octreotide for reversal of hepatorenal syndrome and improving renal function, but it had no superiority comparing to norepinephrine.

New Developments in Hepatorenal Syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) continues to be one of the major complications of decompensated cirrhosis, leading to death in the absence of liver transplantation. Challenges in precisely evaluating renal function in the patient with cirrhosis remain because of the limitations of serum creatinine (Cr) alone in estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR); current GFR estimating models appear to underestimate renal dysfunction. Newer models incorporating renal biomarkers, such as the Cr-Cystatin C GFR Equation for Cirrhosis appear to estimate measured GFR more accurately. A major change in the diagnostic criteria for HRS based on dynamic serial changes in serum Cr that regard HRS type 1 as a special form of acute kidney injury promises the possibility of earlier identification of renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis. The diagnostic criteria of HRS still include the exclusion of other causes of kidney injury. Renal biomarkers have been disappointing in assisting with the differentiation of HRS from prerenal azotemia and other kidney disorders. Serum metabolomic profiling may be a more powerful tool to assess renal dysfunction, although the practical clinical significance of this remains unclear. As a result of the difficulties of assessing renal function in cirrhosis and the varying HRS diagnostic criteria and the rigor with which they are applied, the precise incidence and prevalence of HRS is unknown, but it is likely that HRS occurs more commonly than expected. The pathophysiology of HRS is rooted firmly in the setting of progressive reduction in renal blood flow as a result of portal hypertension and splanchnic vasodilation. Progressive marked renal cortical ischemia in patients with cirrhosis parallels the evolution of diuretic-sensitive ascites to diuretic-refractory ascites and HRS, a recognized continuum of renal dysfunction in cirrhosis. Alterations in nitrous oxide production, both increased and decreased, may play a major role in the pathophysiology of this evolution. The inflammatory cascade, triggered by bacterial translocation and endotoxemia, increasingly recognized as important in the manifestation of acute-on-chronic liver failure, also may play a significant role in the pathophysiology of HRS. The mainstay of treatment remains vasopressor therapy with albumin in an attempt to reverse splanchnic vasodilation and improve renal blood flow. Several meta-analyses have confirmed the value of vasopressors, chiefly terlipressin and noradrenaline, in improving renal function and reversing HRS type 1. Other interventions such as renal replacement therapy, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, and artificial liver support systems have a very limited role in improving outcomes in HRS. Liver transplantation remains the definitive treatment for HRS. The frequency of simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation has increased dramatically in the Model for End-stage Liver Disease era, with changes in organ allocation policies. This has resulted in a more urgent need to predict native kidney recovery from HRS after liver transplantation alone, to avoid unnecessary simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation.

Vasoactive Agents for Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Mixed Treatment Comparison Network Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a common complication among patients with cirrhosis, primarily attributable to vasodilation of renal vessels. Vasoactive agents are commonly used to treat HRS. The present network meta-analysis compares the vasoactive agents used in HRS.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases for appropriate randomized controlled clinical trials in patients with HRS, comparing active interventions with either placebo or standard of care. The primary outcome was complete HRS reversal; secondary outcomes included partial HRS reversal, mortality, adverse events, and cardiovascular adverse events. The data were pooled using a random effects model. We also carried out direct comparisons for the primary outcome with trial sequential analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included in the systematic review. Rates of complete HRS reversal were significantly higher with terlipressin and noradrenaline combined with albumin than with placebo (OR 6.65, 95% CI: 2.08-21.31 and 6.81, 95% CI: 1.87-24.83, respectively). No significant differences were observed in terms of mortality, partial HRS reversal, or adverse events for any of the interventions. However, cardiovascular adverse events were significantly higher with continuous-infusion terlipressin/albumin (OR 7.07, 95% CI: 1.23-40.62), bolus terlipressin/albumin (OR 7.39, 95% CI: 1.89, 28.94), octreotide/midodrine/albumin (OR 9.85, 95% CI: 1.1, 88.1), and noradrenaline/albumin (OR 15.24, 95% CI: 2.1, 112.6) than with albumin alone. Trial sequential analyses revealed adequate evidence to conclude that terlipressin combined with albumin was effective in achieving complete HRS reversal.

DISCUSSION

Terlipressin combined with albumin shows strong evidence of improving short-term survival in patients with type 1 but not type 2 HRS. Through indirect comparison, noradrenaline with albumin was also associated with significant benefits in terms of HRS reversal.

Terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs for hepatorenal syndrome

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome is defined as severe renal failure occurring in people with cirrhosis and ascites. Systematic reviews of randomised clinical trials found that, compared with placebo, terlipressin may reduce mortality and improve renal function in people with hepatorenal syndrome, but we need current evidence from systematic reviews on the benefits and harms of terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs for people with hepatorenal syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded; conducted manual searches of references in relevant literature; and wrote to experts and pharmaceutical companies (date of last search November 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing terlipressin versus any other type of vasoactive drugs for hepatorenal syndrome. We allowed albumin and other cointerventions if provided equally in the comparison groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently extracted data. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatorenal syndrome (persistent hepatorenal syndrome despite treatment), and serious adverse events. We conducted meta-analyses and present the results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We performed sensitivity, subgroup, and Trial Sequential Analyses and evaluated bias control based on the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 randomised clinical trials with 474 participants. The trials compared terlipressin versus noradrenaline (seven trials), octreotide (one trial), midodrine and octreotide (one trial), or dopamine (one trial). All participants in both groups received albumin as cointervention. We classified two trials at low risk of bias and eight trials at high risk of bias in the assessment of mortality and all trials at high risk of bias for remaining outcomes. In five trials, investigators specifically stated that they did not receive funding from for-profit organisations. We had no information about the funding source from the remaining five trials.Terlipressin was not superior or inferior compared with other vasoactive drugs in regard to mortality when including the two trials with a low risk of bias (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.36; 94 participants, very low quality evidence) or when including all 10 trials (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06; 474 participants; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence). One meta-analysis including nine trials suggested a beneficial effect of terlipressin on hepatorenal syndrome (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99; 394 participants; I² = 26%; very low quality evidence). Due to the high mortality of hepatorenal syndrome, the registration of other serious adverse events is uncertain, but comparing terlipressin and other vasoactive drugs we found no significant difference (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06; 474 participants; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence). Several trials did not report systematically of adverse events, but terlipressin seemed to increase the risks of diarrhoea or abdominal pain, or both (RR 3.50, 95% CI 1.19 to 10.27; 221 participants; 5 trials, I² = 0%). However, Trial Sequential Analyses found insufficient evidence to support or refute any differences between interventions for all outcomes. Considering reversal of hepatorenal syndrome, subgroup analyses on the type of other vasoactive drugs found that terlipressin was superior compared with midodrine and octreotide (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.72) or octreotide alone (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.96), but each subgroup only included one small trial. None of the remaining subgroup or sensitivity analyses found differences between terlipressin and other vasoactive drugs. We downgraded the evidence to very low quality because of the high risk of bias, imprecision, and the results of the Trial Sequential Analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review found insufficient evidence to support or refute beneficial or harmful effects of terlipressin and albumin versus other vasoactive drugs and albumin. Additional research is needed to evaluate if clinically meaningful differences exist between interventions.

Acute kidney injury in acute-on-chronic liver failure: where does hepatorenal syndrome fit?

Renal dysfunction occurs in 25% to 50% of patients with cirrhosis admitted to the hospital with an acute episode of hepatic decompensation and may be due to underlying chronic kidney disease, an acute deterioration, or both. An acute deterioration in renal function in cirrhotic patients is now collectively referred to as acute kidney injury (AKI), which has been subclassified into different grades of severity that identify prognostic groups. Acute-on-chronic liver failure is characterized by acute hepatic and/or extrahepatic organ failure driven by a dysregulated immune response and systemic inflammatory response. AKI is also one of the defining features of ACLF and a major component in grading the severity of acute-on-chronic liver failure. As such, the pattern of AKI now observed in patients admitted to the hospital with acutely decompensated liver disease is likely to be one of inflammatory kidney injury including acute tubular injury (referred in this review as non-hepatorenal syndrome [HRS]-AKI) rather than HRS. As the management and supportive treatment of non-HRS-AKI potentially differ from those of HRS, then from the nephrology perspective, it is important to distinguish between non-HRS-AKI and HRS-AKI when reviewing patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure and AKI, so that appropriate and early management can be instituted.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: vasoactive drugs for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome type 1

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS1) is a functional, rapidly progressive, potentially reversible form of acute kidney injury occurring in patients with cirrhosis. Characterised by intense renal arterial vasoconstriction, it carries a very poor prognosis. There is a significant unmet need for a widely approved, safe and effective pharmacological treatment.

AIM

To re-evaluate efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for HRS1, in the light of recently published randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane registers were searched for RCTs reporting efficacy and adverse events related to pharmacological treatment of HRS1. Search terms included: 'hepatorenal syndrome', 'terlipressin', 'noradrenaline', 'octreotide', 'midodrine', 'vasopressin', 'dopamine', 'albumin' and synonyms. Comparison of vasoactive drugs vs. placebo/no treatment, and two active drugs were included. Meta-analysis was performed for HRS1 reversal, creatinine improvement, mortality and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs enrolling 700 HRS1 patients were included. Treatment with terlipressin and albumin led to HRS1 reversal more frequently than albumin alone or placebo (RR: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.51-4.26). Noradrenaline was effective in reversing HRS1, but trials were small and nonblinded. Overall, there was mortality benefit with terlipressin (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.63-1.01), but sensitivity analysis including only trials with low risk of selection bias weakened this relationship (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.71-1.06). Notably, there was a significant risk of adverse events with terlipressin therapy (RR: 4.32, 95% CI: 0.75-24.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin treatment is superior to placebo for achieving HRS1 reversal, but mortality benefit is less clear. Terlipressin is associated with significant adverse events, but infusion regimens may be better tolerated. There is continued need for safe and effective treatment options for hepatorenal syndrome.

Hepatorenal syndrome: Update on diagnosis and therapy

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a manifestation of extreme circulatory dysfunction and entails high morbidity and mortality. A new definition has been recently recommended by the International Club of Ascites, according to which HRS diagnosis relies in serum creatinine changes instead that on a fixed high value. Moreover, new data on urinary biomarkers has been recently published. In this sense, the use of urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin seems useful to identify patients with acute tubular necrosis and should be employed in the diagnostic algorithm. Treatment with terlipressin and albumin is the current standard of care. Recent data show that terlipressin in intravenous continuous infusion is better tolerated than intravenous boluses and has the same efficacy. Terlipressin is effective in reversing HRS in only 40%-50% of patients. Serum bilirubin and creatinine levels along with the increase in blood pressure and the presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome have been identified as predictors of response. Clearly, there is a need for further research in novel treatments. Other treatments have been assessed such as noradrenaline, dopamine, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, renal and liver replacement therapy, etc. Among all of them, liver transplant is the only curative option and should be considered in all patients. HRS can be prevented with volume expansion with albumin during spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and after post large volume paracentesis, and with antibiotic prophylaxis in patients with advanced cirrhosis and low proteins in the ascitic fluid. This manuscript reviews the recent advances in the diagnosis and management of this life-threatening condition.

Comparative efficacy of pharmacological strategies for management of type 1 hepatorenal syndrome: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several drugs have been studied to improve outcomes for patients with hepatorenal syndrome, but trials have reported variable efficacy. We aimed to compare the efficacy of different management strategies for type 1 hepatorenal syndrome.

METHODS

For this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, and Web of Science for papers published up to June 9, 2016. We selected randomised controlled trials of adults (>18 years) with decompensated cirrhosis and type 1 hepatorenal syndrome that compared the efficacy of active vasoactive drugs (terlipressin, midodrine, octreotide, noradrenaline, and dopamine; alone or in combination) with placebo or each other. The primary outcome was reduction in short-term mortality. Secondary outcomes were reversal of hepatorenal syndrome, relapse of hepatorenal syndrome after initial reversal, and adverse events. We did pairwise and network meta-analyses to produce odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. We used the GRADE criteria to appraise quality of evidence.

FINDINGS

We identified 13 randomised controlled trials done in 739 adults with type 1 hepatorenal syndrome. All participants received supportive therapy with albumin. Moderate-quality evidence might support the use of terlipressin over placebo for reduction of short-term mortality (OR 0·65, 95% CI 0·41-1·05), whereas only low-quality evidence supported the use of noradrenaline, midodrine plus octreotide, and dopamine plus furosemide over placebo to reduce mortality, and no ORs for any of the comparisons versus placebo were significant. Moderate-quality evidence supported the use of terlipressin over midodrine plus octreotide (OR 26·25, 95% CI 3·07-224·21) to reverse hepatorenal syndrome, with low-quality evidence supporting the use of noradrenaline over placebo (4·17, 1·37-12·50) and over midodrine plus octreotide (10·00, 1·49-50·00) for this outcome. A median of 16% (range 5-20) of terlipressin-treated patients, and 33% (range 6-40) noradrenaline-treated patients with reversal of hepatorenal syndrome had recurrence on discontinuation of therapy. A median of 8% (range 4-22) terlipressin-treated patients required discontinuation of therapy due to serious adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

Terlipressin with albumin might reduce short-term mortality compared with placebo in patients with type 1 hepatorenal syndrome. Terlipressin with albumin and noradrenaline with albumin are both superior to midodrine plus octreotide with albumin for reversal of hepatorenal syndrome. Pragmatic clinical trials of terlipressin with albumin are warranted to evaluate real-world effectiveness and safety in patients with type 1 hepatorenal syndrome.

FUNDING

None.

Terlipressin plus albumin for treatment of type 1 hepatorenal syndrome: A meta-analysis

AIM

to assess the efficacy of terlipressin plus albumin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS).

METHODS

Cochrane strategy was used to identify randomized controlled trials published before July 2016 by searching PubMed, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science and LILACS, Medline, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, Chongqing VIP Information Co., Ltd, China National Knowledge Internet Database, and Wanfang Data.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials involving 542 cases were selected for this meta-analysis. The HRS remission rate and the survival rate were increased by terlipressin plus albumin, with OR = 5.25 (95%CI: 2.77-6.52) and 2.33 (95%CI: 1.11-4.88) compared with albumin alone, respectively. Blood creatinine was decreased by the combination treatment, and mean arterial pressure was increased significantly, while there was no difference in urine output. Side effects due to systemic circulation congestion and peripheral vasoconstriction were reported, such as stomach ache and extremity cyanosis. No fatal side effect was reported.

CONCLUSION

compared with albumin alone, terlipressin plus albumin is effective in the treatment of HRS, as demonstrated by increased remission rate and survival rate and no occurrence of fatal side effect.

Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy: Another Case of a Successful Approach to Treatment of Hepatorenal Syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is defined as a failure of renal function, potentially reversible, in patients with liver cirrhosis and ascites. Recently, a component of cardiomyopathy associated with HRS was described, but the use of positive inotropic medicine as part of the treatment of the acute phase has not been extensively evaluated. We report a second case in our hospital of a patient with HRS type I without previous heart disease, with secondary hemodynamic decompensation due to liver disease, in which the abnormalities in systolic function by speckle-tracking echocardiography were observed and could be reversed by the use of inotropes. After partial response to current therapies, the patient presented a clinical and laboratorial response with improvement of renal function after infusion of dobutamine. Clinical studies are needed for the therapy approach to HRS taking into account myocardial dysfunction as a major contributing factor for renal dysfunction.