Possible benefit of splenectomy in liver transplantation for autoimmune hepatitis

Evaluation the efficacy and safety of simultaneous splenectomy in liver transplantation patients: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous splenectomy during liver transplantation (LT) is debated. The present meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of splenectomy on the outcome of LT patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Wanfang databases for relevant studies published until the date of July 15, 2017. Quality assessment of the included studies was performed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale judgment. The data were analyzed using RevMan5.3 software.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies consisting of 2198 patients (892 patients received splenectomy during LT [SPLT group] and 1306 patients received LT only [LT group]) were included in the present meta-analysis. Efficacy analysis revealed that pooled hazard ratio for overall survival (OS) between 2 groups was not significantly different (hazard ratio = 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.50). SPLT group had less postoperative rejection (odds ratio [OR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.50-0.79) and small for size syndrome (OR = 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07-0.79). SPLT group had significantly lower preoperative platelet (mean difference [MD] = -17.23, 95% CI: -19.54, -14.91), but significantly higher postoperative platelet (MD = 170.45, 95% CI: 108.33-232.56). Conversely, SPLT group had significant higher preoperative portal pressure (MD = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.75-2.33) and significant lower postoperative portal pressure (MD = -1.17, 95% CI: -2.24, -0.11). Safety analysis revealed that SPLT group had significantly longer operation time (MD = 56.66, 95% CI: 35.96-77.35), more intraoperative blood loss (MD = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.25-1.91), and more intraoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (MD = 3.77, 95% CI: 3.22-4.33). Furthermore, SPLT group had significantly higher incidence of postoperative hemorrhage (OR = 3.07, 95% CI: 1.92-4.91), postoperative thrombosis (OR = 3.63, 95% CI: 1.06-12.45), and perioperative infection (OR = 2.62, 95% CI: 1.76-3.90). In addition, perioperative mortality was significantly higher in the SPLT group (OR = 3.14, 95% CI: 1.31-7.52). Postoperative hospital stay did not differ significantly between 2 groups (OR = -1.75, 95% CI: -3.66-0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Splenectomy benefits LT patients in increasing platelet count. However, splenectomy is a morbid procedure as splenectomy increases operation time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative RBC transfusion, and postoperative complications. Splenectomy does not improve OS but increase perioperative mortality. Therefore, splenectomy should be performed only in selective patients.

Autoimmune hepatitis: current challenges and future prospects

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a chronic progressive liver disease characterized by high levels of aminotransferases and autoantibodies, hypergammaglobulinemia, and interface hepatitis. AIH affects all races and all ages worldwide, regardless of sex, although a preponderance of females is a constant finding. The etiology of AIH has not been completely elucidated, but immunogenetic background and environmental parameters may contribute to its development. The most important genetic factor is human leukocyte antigens (HLAs), especially HLA-DR, whereas the role of environmental factors is not completely understood. Immunologically, disruption of the immune tolerance to autologous liver antigens may be a trigger of AIH. The diagnosis of classical AIH is fairly easy, though not without pitfalls. In contrast, the diagnosis of atypical AIH poses great challenges. There is confusion as to the definition of the disease entity and its boundaries in the diagnosis of overlap syndrome, drug-induced autoimmune hepatitis, and AIH with concomitant nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) or chronic hepatitis C. Centrilobular zonal necrosis is now included in the histological spectrum of AIH. However, the definition and the significance of AIH presenting with centrilobular zonal necrosis have not been examined extensively. In ~20% of AIH patients who are treated for the first time with standard therapy, remission is not achieved. The development of more effective and better tolerated novel therapies is an urgent need. In this review, we discuss the current challenges and the future prospects in relation to the diagnosis and treatment of AIH, which have been attracting considerable recent attention.

Autoimmune Hepatitis-related Cirrhosis: Clinical Features and Effectiveness of Immunosuppressive Treatment in Chinese Patients

Background:

The long-term outcomes of patients with autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) given the immunosuppressive treatment are considered to be preferable. However, little is known about the response of AIH patients with cirrhosis to immunosuppressive treatment. We assessed the effects of immunosuppressive therapy in Chinese AIH patients with cirrhosis from a tertiary hospital.

Methods:

Patients with a clinical diagnosis of AIH January 2000 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Two-hundred and fourteen patients who were followed up and satisfied the simplified AIH criteria were included in the study. Among these patients, 87 presented with cirrhosis when initially diagnosed for AIH. Immunosuppressive treatments were employed in 57 AIH patients who did not present with cirrhosis and 39 patients who presented with cirrhosis. Initial responses to immunosuppressive treatment of patients with and without cirrhosis were analyzed. Independent risk factors were assessed for predicting the prognosis of patients. The t-test and Cox regression statistical analysis were used.

Results:

In total, 96 AIH patients including 39 with cirrhosis and 57 without cirrhosis underwent immunosuppressive therapy. The overall complete remission after initial immunosuppressive treatment was achieved in 81/96 patients (84.4%), whereas 9/96 (9.4%) achieved incomplete response, and 6/96 (6.3%) occurred treatment failure. Compared to noncirrhotic patients, patients who presented with cirrhosis responded to treatment to a comparable extent regarding complete response (noncirrhosis 50/57 [87.7%] vs. cirrhosis 31/39 [79.5%], P = 0.275), incomplete remission (noncirrhosis 4/57 [7.0%] vs. cirrhosis 5/39 [12.8%], P = 0.338), and treatment failure (noncirrhosis 3/57 [5.3%] vs. cirrhosis 3/39 [7.7%], P = 0.629). Importantly, the remission rate was comparable (54/57 [94.7%] and 36/39 [92.3%], P = 0.629) for noncirrhotic and cirrhotic patients after immunosuppressive therapy. Compared to patients who maintained remission (n = 19) after drug withdrawal, patients who experienced relapse (n = 17) had significantly higher levels of serum immunoglobulin G at entry (15.0 ± 6.5 g/L vs. 22.3 ± 5.8 g/L, t = 2.814, P = 0.004). Moreover, cirrhosis at presentation significantly increased the risk of disease exacerbation (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.603; P = 0.002). The treatment of immunosuppressant (HR: 0.058; P = 0.005) and the level of aspartate aminotransferase at presentation (HR: 1.002; P = 0.017) also increased the risk of disease progression.

Conclusions:

The efficacy of initial immunosuppressive treatment in AIH patients with cirrhosis is comparable to that in those without cirrhosis. Cirrhotic patients not treated by immunosuppressants have poor long-term outcomes.

Autoimmune hepatitis: recent advances in the pathogenesis and new diagnostic guidelines in Japan

Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is thought to be associated with various genetic and immunological abnormalities. Concerning the pathogenesis of AIH, increasing attention has been paid to genome-wide association studies, toll-like receptors and Treg/Th17 balance. For Japanese patients with AIH, novel diagnostic guidelines have been proposed in view of the differential clinical features between Japanese and Caucasian patients. However, the diagnosis of some patients in acute hepatitis phase is not easy. Histologically, centrilobular necrosis without portal inflammation is particularly characteristic in the acute hepatitis phase. Some patients become resistant to steroid therapy and have a very poor prognosis once they progress to acute hepatic failure. Therefore, additional revision of the current diagnostic criteria, including severity grading, will be needed in the future.