Carvedilol Combined With Ivabradine Improves Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction, Clinical Progression, and Survival in Cirrhosis

Carvedilol and traditional nonselective beta blockers for the secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage and portal hypertension related complications among patients with decompensated cirrhosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Carvedilol has limited research on decompensated cirrhosis. This study compared the effects of carvedilol, traditional nonselective beta blockers (NSBBs), including propranolol and nadolol, and other interventions in patients using carvedilol or traditional NSBBs for secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage (VH) and portal hypertension (PH)-related complications.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, was conducted through October 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating carvedilol or traditional NSBBs for secondary prophylaxis of VH were included. The outcomes were the occurrence of VH and portal PH-related complications, including new or worsening ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome. A network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 60 RCTs involving 5,600 patients with a median Child Pugh score of 8.0 (range 6.8-10) were included. The risk of carvedilol plus variceal band ligation (VBL) on VH was lower than placebo (relative risk (RR) 0.24; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10-0.57), and the risk of carvedilol on new or worsening ascites was lower than placebo (RR = 0.10, 95%CI; 0.01-0.93). Traditional NSBBs plus VBL also had preventive effects on VH compared to placebo (RR = 0.31, 95%CI; 0.18-0.54). However, there were no differences between carvedilol and traditional NSBBs in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Carvedilol can prevent PH-related complications, including VH and new or worsening ascites, in cirrhosis patients with a history of VH. No significant differences were observed between the effects of carvedilol and traditional NSBBs, both combined with VBL.

Midodrine plus propranolol versus propranolol alone in preventing first bleed in patients with cirrhosis and severe ascites: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Propranolol, a non-selective beta-blocker, commonly used to prevent variceal bleed, but might precipitate circulatory dysfunction in severe ascites. Midodrine, an alpha-1 adrenergic agonist improves renal perfusion and systemic hemodynamics. Addition of midodrine might facilitate higher maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of propranolol, thereby less risk of variceal bleed in cirrhosis patients with severe ascites.

METHODS

140 patients with cirrhosis and severe/refractory ascites were randomized- propranolol and midodrine (Gr.A,n = 70) or propranolol alone (Gr.B,n = 70). Primary outcome was incidence of bleed at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included ascites control, achievement of target heart rate (THR), HVPG response and adverse effects.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were comparable between two groups. Cumulative incidence of bleed at 1 year was lower in Gr.A than B (8.5%vs.27.1%,p-0.043). The MTD of propranolol was higher in Gr.A (96.67 ± 36.6 mg vs. 76.52 ± 24.4 mg; p-0.01) and more patients achieved THR (84.2%vs.55.7%,p-0.034). Significantly higher proportion of patients in Gr.A had complete resolution of ascites [17.1%vs.11.4%,p-0.014), diuretic tolerance (80%vs.60%,p-0.047) at higher doses(p-0.02) and lesser need for paracentesis. Patients in Gr.A also had greater reduction in variceal grade (75.7%vs.55.7%;p-0.01), plasma renin activity (54.4% from baseline) (p = 0.02). Mean HVPG reduction was greater in Gr.A than B [4.38 ± 2.81 mmHg(23.5%) vs. 2.61 ± 2.87 mmHg(14.5%),p-0.045]. Complications like post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis on follow-up were higher in Gr.B than A (22.8%vs.51.4%,p = 0.013 and 10%vs.15.7%, p = 0.03, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Addition of midodrine facilitates effective use of propranolol in higher doses and greater HVPG reduction, thereby preventing first variceal bleed, reduced paracentesis requirements with fewer ascites- related complications in patients with cirrhosis with severe/refractory ascites.

Bleeding Complications of Portal Hypertension

In portal hypertension, acute variceal bleed is the cause of 2/3rd of all upper gastrointestinal bleeding episodes. It is a life-threatening emergency in patients with cirrhosis. Nonselective beta-blockers by decreasing the hepatic venous pressure gradient are the mainstay of medical therapy for the prevention of variceal bleeding and rebleeding. Evaluation of the severity of bleed, hemodynamic resuscitation, prophylactic antibiotic, and intravenous splanchnic vasoconstrictors should precede the endoscopy procedure. Endoscopic band ligation is the recommended endotherapy. Rescue transjugular intrahepatic port-systemic shunt (TIPS) is recommended for variceal bleed refractory to endotherapy. In patients with a high risk of failure of combined pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy, pre-emptive TIPS may improve the outcome. For gastric varices, "Sarin classification" is universally applied as it is simple and has therapeutic implication. For IGV1 and GOV2, injection cyanoacrylate glue is considered the endotherapy of choice. Endoscopic ultrasound is a useful modality in the management of gastric varices.

Therapies for Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy: Current Perspectives and Future Possibilities

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM) is defined as cardiac dysfunction associated with cirrhosis in the absence of pre-existing heart disease. CCM manifests as the enlargement of cardiac chambers, attenuated systolic and diastolic contractile responses to stress stimuli, and repolarization changes. CCM significantly contributes to mortality and morbidity in patients who undergo liver transplantation and contributes to the pathogenesis of hepatorenal syndrome/acute kidney injury. There is currently no specific treatment. The traditional management for non-cirrhotic cardiomyopathies, such as vasodilators or diuretics, is not applicable because an important feature of cirrhosis is decreased systemic vascular resistance; therefore, vasodilators further worsen the peripheral vasodilatation and hypotension. Long-term diuretic use may cause electrolyte imbalances and potentially renal injury. The heart of the cirrhotic patient is insensitive to cardiac glycosides. Therefore, these types of medications are not useful in patients with CCM. Exploring the therapeutic strategies of CCM is of the utmost importance. The present review summarizes the possible treatment of CCM. We detail the current status of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) in the management of cirrhotic patients and discuss the controversies surrounding NSBBs in clinical practice. Other possible therapeutic agents include drugs with antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and anti-apoptotic functions; such effects may have potential clinical application. These drugs currently are mainly based on animal studies and include statins, taurine, spermidine, galectin inhibitors, albumin, and direct antioxidants. We conclude with speculations on the future research directions in CCM treatment.

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy: Pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis

Cardiac dysfunction among cirrhotic patients has long been recognized in the medical community. While it was originally believed to be a direct result of alcohol toxicity, in the last 30 years cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM) has been described as a syndrome characterized by chronic cardiac dysfunction in cirrhotic patients in the absence of known cardiac disease, regardless of the etiology of cirrhosis. CCM occurs in about 60% of patients with cirrhosis and plays a critical role in disease progression and treatment outcomes. Due to its predominantly asymptomatic course, diagnosing CCM is challenging and requires a high index of suspicion and a multiparametric approach. Patients with CCM usually present with the following triad: impaired myocardial contractile response to exercise, inadequate ventricular relaxation, and electrophysiological abnormalities (notably prolonged QT interval). In recent years, research in this area has grown expeditiously and a new set of diagnostic criteria has been developed by the Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy Consortium, to properly identify patients with CCM. Nevertheless, CCM is still largely unknown among clinicians, and a major part of its pathophysiology and treatment is yet to be understood. In the present work, we aim to compile and summarize the available data on the pathogenesis, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of CCM.

Heart failure with severely reduced ejection fraction after liver transplantation: a case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation (LT) is a strenuous event for the cardiovascular system. Cardiovascular events (CVE), including heart failure (HF), arrhythmias and myocardial ischemia, are important causes of peri- and post-liver transplantation morbidity and mortality.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe the case of a 45-year-old male patient who developed heart failure with severely reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) after receiving liver transplantation (LT) for end-stage post-alcoholic liver cirrhosis. Preoperative transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) demonstrated borderline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 50% and diastolic dysfunction grade 2. On coronary angiography, the patient had no coronary stenoses. Persistent vasopressor need, increasing creatinine levels and progressive pleural effusion characterized the early postoperative period. TTE on postoperative day 6 revealed a new finding of a markedly reduced LVEF of 15%, accompanied by a discrete increase in hs-TnI and CK-MB without electrocardiographic (ECG) ST-T abnormalities. LVEF did not recover completely (EF 45%) during follow-up. The patient had a sudden death 4.5 months post-liver transplantation.

CONCLUSION

Our case demonstrates that the risk of post-LT systolic dysfunction is not excluded by preoperative resting examinations within normal range and highlights the need for preoperative cardiac stress assessment (e.g. dobutamine echocardiography or stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging) before LT. In addition, patients on a liver-transplant waiting list with cardiac dysfunction should be followed by a multidisciplinary team including a dedicated cardiology team experienced in managing liver-related cardiac pathology.

B-Blockers in Liver Cirrhosis: A Wonder Drug for Every Stage of Portal Hypertension? A Narrative Review

In cirrhotic patients, non-selective b-blockers (NSBBs) constitute the reference treatment of choice as monotherapy or combined with band ligation for the prevention of first variceal bleeding and rebleeding, respectively. Furthermore, the last Baveno VII guidelines recommended carvedilol, a b-blocker with additional anti-a1 receptor activity, in all compensated cirrhotics with clinically significant portal hypertension, to prevent liver decompensation. Interestingly enough, NSBBs have been reported to have a potentially positive impact on the short-term mortality of patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure. However, concerns remain about the use of b-blockers in the presence of severe complications, such as refractory ascites, hepatorenal syndrome, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, or established cirrhotic cardiomyopathy. In addition, it has not been verified yet whether carvedilol supersedes all the other NSBBs in every stage of liver disease, even when severe complications have developed. Therefore, this review aims to illustrate recent data regarding the potential role of b-blockers across all stages of liver disease, beyond the primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, and address the authors' proposals on the use of NSBBs concerning the severity of liver disease and the patient's performance status.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Non-selective beta-blockers and the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with cirrhosis: a meta-analysis

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a serious complication of cirrhosis. Currently, non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) are commonly used to treat portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis. The latest research shows that NSBBs can induce apoptosis and S-phase arrest in liver cancer cells and inhibit the development of hepatic vascular endothelial cells, which may be effective in preventing HCC in cirrhosis patients. Aim: To determine the relationship between different NSBBs and HCC incidence in patients with cirrhosis. Methods: We searched the Cochrane database, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science. Cohort studies, case‒control studies, and randomized controlled trials were included if they involved cirrhosis patients who were divided into an experimental group using NSBBs and a control group with any intervention. Based on heterogeneity, we calculated odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effect models. We also conducted subgroup analysis to explore the source of heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias detection were performed. Results: A total of 47 studies included 38 reporting HCC incidence, 26 reporting HCC-related mortality, and 39 reporting overall mortality. The HCC incidence between the experimental group and the control group was OR = 0.87 (0.69 and 1.10), p = 0.000, and I2 = 81.8%. There was no significant association between propranolol (OR = 0.94 and 95%CI 0.62-1.44) or timolol (OR = 1.32 and 95%CI 0.44-3.95) and HCC incidence, while the risk of HCC decreased by 26% and 38% with nadolol (OR = 0.74 and 95%CI 0.64-0.86) and carvedilol (OR = 0.62 and 95%CI 0.52-0.74), respectively. Conclusion: Different types of NSBB have different effects on the incidence of patients with cirrhosis of the liver, where nadolol and carvedilol can reduce the risk. Also, the effect of NSBBs may vary in ethnicity. Propranolol can reduce HCC incidence in Europe and America. Systematic Review Registration: identifier https://CRD42023434175, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/.

Pathophysiology and management of liver cirrhosis: from portal hypertension to acute-on-chronic liver failure

Cirrhosis transcends various progressive stages from compensation to decompensation driven by the severity of portal hypertension. The downstream effect of increasing portal hypertension severity leads to various pathophysiological pathways, which result in the cardinal complications of cirrhosis, including ascites, variceal hemorrhage, and hepatic encephalopathy. Additionally, the severity of portal hypertension is the central driver for further advanced complications of hyperdynamic circulation, hepatorenal syndrome, and cirrhotic cardiomyopathy. The management of these individual complications has specific nuances which have undergone significant developments. In contrast to the classical natural history of cirrhosis and its complications which follows an insidious trajectory, acute-on-chronic failure (ACLF) leads to a rapidly downhill course with high short-term mortality unless intervened at the early stages. The management of ACLF involves specific interventions, which have quickly evolved in recent years. In this review, we focus on complications of portal hypertension and delve into an approach toward ACLF.

Ischemic Heart Disease and Liver Cirrhosis: Adding Insult to Injury

The link between heart and liver cirrhosis was recognized decades ago, although much data regarding atherosclerosis and ischemic heart disease are still missing. Ischemic heart disease or coronary artery disease (CAD) and liver cirrhosis could be associated with characteristic epidemiological and pathophysiological features. This connection determines increased rates of morbidity and all-cause mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. In the era of a metabolic syndrome and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease pandemic, primary prevention and early diagnosis of coronary artery disease could improve the prognosis of liver cirrhosis patients. This review outlines a summary of the literature regarding prevalence, risk assessment and medical and interventional treatment options in this particular population. A collaborative heart–liver team-based approach is imperative for critical management decisions for patients with CAD and liver cirrhosis.

Management of Portal Hypertension

Portal hypertension is the cause of the clinical complications associated with cirrhosis. The primary complications of portal hypertension are ascites, acute variceal bleed, and hepatic encephalopathy. Hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement remains the gold standard test for diagnosing cirrhosis-related portal hypertension. Hepatic venous pressure gradient more than 10 mmHg is associated with an increased risk of complications and is termed clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). Clinical, laboratory, and imaging methods can also aid in diagnosing CSPH non-invasively. Recently, deep learning methods have been demonstrated to diagnose CSPH effectively. The management of portal hypertension is always individualized and is dependent on the etiology, the availability of therapies, and the degree of portal hypertension complications. In this review, we discuss the diagnosis and management of cirrhosis-related portal hypertension in detail. Also, we highlight the history of portal hypertension and future research areas in portal hypertension.

The challenges of ascites management: An Indian perspective

Content available: Author Interview and Audio Recording.

Diagnosis and Management of Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy refers to the structural and functional changes in the heart leading to either impaired systolic, diastolic, electrocardiographic, and neurohormonal changes associated with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy is present in 50% of patients with cirrhosis and is clinically seen as impaired contractility, diastolic dysfunction, hyperdynamic circulation, and electromechanical desynchrony such as QT prolongation. In this review, we will discuss the cardiac physiology principles underlying cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, imaging techniques such as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and scintigraphy, cardiac biomarkers, and newer echocardiographic techniques such as tissue Doppler imaging and speckle tracking, and emerging treatments to improve outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed available literature from MEDLINE for randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, and real-world outcomes using the search terms "cirrhotic cardiomyopathy," "left ventricular diastolic dysfunction," "heart failure in cirrhosis," "liver transplantation," and "coronary artery disease".

RESULTS

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy is associated with increased risk of complications such as hepatorenal syndrome, refractory ascites, impaired response to stressors including sepsis, bleeding or transplantation, poor health-related quality of life and increased morbidity and mortality. The evaluation of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy should also guide the feasibility of procedures such as transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, dose titration protocol of betablockers, and liver transplantation. The use of targeted heart rate reduction is of interest to improve cardiac filling and improve the cardiac output using repurposed heart failure drugs such as ivabradine. Liver transplantation may also reverse the cirrhotic cardiomyopathy; however, careful cardiac evaluation is necessary to rule out coronary artery disease and improve cardiac outcomes in the perioperative period.

CONCLUSION

More data are needed on the new diagnostic criteria, molecular and biochemical changes, and repurposed drugs in cirrhotic cardiomyopathy. The use of advanced imaging techniques should be incorporated in clinical practice.

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.

Diastolic Dysfunction Is a Predictor of Poor Survival in Patients with Decompensated Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) appears to be the earliest cardiac disturbance in cirrhosis patients. There are many previous reports reporting the significance of severity of LVDD on the outcome of liver transplantation or TIPS insertion, a few Indian studies have addressed the role of LVDD on survival in decompensated cirrhosis. The objective of this study is to assess the effect of LVDD on the survival of decompensated cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

We prospectively evaluated 92 decompensated cirrhotic patients from April 2015 to March 2017 at IMS and SUM Hospital, Bhubaneswar, India. 2D echocardiography with tissue Doppler imaging was used to evaluate cardiac function, as per the American society of echocardiography guidelines. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the effect of LVDD on overall mortality.

RESULTS

Ninety-two decompensated cirrhotic patients were evaluated in this prospective cohort study. Twenty-eight out of 92 patients (30%) died due to liver-related complications after a follow-up of 24 months. The decompensated cirrhotic patients with MELD score ≥ 15 had a significantly higher E/e' ratio (11.94 ± 4.24 vs. 8.74 ± 3.32, p < 0.001) suggesting severe LV dysfunction in advanced cirrhosis. Patients with E/e' ratio > 10 had significantly higher MELD score and Child-Pugh score (19.88 ± 7.72 vs. 14.31 ± 5.83; 10.25 ± 1.74 vs. 9.02 ± 1.74, p < 0.01, respectively) as compared to theE/e' ratio < 10 group. In Cox proportional hazard multivariate analysis, E/e' ≥ 10 (HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.07-6.9, p = 0.03) and serum albumin (HR 0.32, 95% CI 0.14-0.7, p < 0.01) were found to be independent predictors of mortality in decompensated cirrhotic patients.

CONCLUSION

: The presence of LVDD and low serum albumin were independent predictors of mortality in decompensated cirrhotic patients. Hence, LVDD is an indicator of advanced cirrhosis and mortality.

Mechanistic insights into the pathophysiology of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy

Myocardial dysfunction in end stage cirrhotic liver disease, termed cirrhotic cardiomyopathy, is a long known, but little understood comorbidity seen in ∼50% of adults and children who present for liver transplantation. Structural, functional, hemodynamic and electrocardiographic aberrations that occur in the heart as a direct consequence of a damaged liver, is associated with multi-organ failure and increased mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing surgical procedures such as porto-systemic shunt placement and liver transplantation. Despite its clinical significance and rapid advances in science and pharmacotherapy, there is yet no specific treatment for this disease. This may be due to a lack of understanding of the pathogenesis and mechanisms behind how a cirrhotic liver causes cardiac pathology. This review will focus specifically on insights into the molecular mechanisms that drive this liver-heart interaction. Deeper understanding of the etio-pathogenesis of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy will allow us to design and test treatments that can be targeted to prevent and/or reverse this co-morbid consequence of liver failure and improve health care delivery and outcomes in patients with cirrhosis.

β-blockers in advanced cirrhosis: More friend than enemy

Nonselective beta-adrenergic blocker (NSBB) therapy for the prevention of initial and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding in cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices has been used for the past four decades. NSBB therapy is considered the cornerstone of treatment for varices, and has become the standard of care. However, a 2010 study from the group that pioneered β-blocker therapy suggested a detrimental effect of NSBBs in decompensated cirrhosis, especially in patients with refractory ascites. Since then, numerous additional studies have incompletely resolved whether NSBBs are deleterious, although more recent evidence weighs against a harmful effect. The possibility of a "therapeutic window" has also been raised. We aimed to review the literature to analyze the pros and cons of using NSBBs in patients with cirrhosis, not only with respect to bleeding or mortality but also to other potential benefits and risks. β-blockers are highly effective in preventing first bleeding and recurrent bleeding. Furthermore, NSBBs improve congestion/ischemia of the gut mucosa, decrease intestinal permeability, and therefore indirectly alleviate systemic inflammation. β-blockers shorten the electrocardiographic prolonged QTc interval and may also decrease the incidence of hepatocellular carcinoma. On the other hand, the possibility of deleterious effects in cirrhosis has not been completely eliminated. NSBBs may be associated with an increased risk of portal vein thrombosis, although this could be correlational artifact. Overall, we conclude that β-blockers in cirrhosis are much more of a friend than enemy.

Point-of-Care Thoracic Ultrasonography in Patients With Cirrhosis and Liver Failure

Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) helps determine liver-related pathologies like an abscess, portal vein or hepatic vein thromboses, presence of ascites, site for pleural or ascitic paracentesis, and guiding biopsies. POCUS is revolutionizing the management of critically ill patients presenting with pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, acute-on-chronic liver failure, and in the emergency. The objectives of thoracic ultrasonography (TUS) are to aid the clinician in differentiating between pneumonia, effusions, interstitial edema and collections, and in estimating the volume status of patients with liver disease using inferior vena cava dynamic indices. The use of POCUS in patients with cirrhosis has since evolved. It is now widely used to help diagnose volume status, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, myocardial infarction, and right ventricular dilation due to pulmonary embolism and to determine the causes for weaning failures such as effusions, lung collapse, and pneumothorax. During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, moving patients for computed tomography can be difficult. Therefore, TUS is now essential in liver transplantation and intensive care practice to assess ventilatory pressures, cardiac function, and fluid management. This review indicates the current and optimized use of TUS, offers a practical guide on TUS in the liver intensive care unit (ICU), and presents a diagnostic pathway for determining lung and pleural pathology, resolution of respiratory failure, and aid weaning from mechanical ventilation.

Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM), cardiac dysfunction in end-stage liver disease in the absence of prior heart disease, is an important clinical entity that contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality. The original definition for CCM, established in 2005 at the World Congress of Gastroenterology (WCG), was based upon known echocardiographic parameters to identify subclinical cardiac dysfunction in the absence of overt structural abnormalities. Subsequent advances in cardiovascular imaging and in particular myocardial deformation imaging have rendered the WCG criteria outdated. A number of investigations have explored other factors relevant to CCM, including serum markers, electrocardiography, and magnetic resonance imaging. CCM characteristics include a hyperdynamic circulatory state, impaired contractility, altered diastolic relaxation, and electrophysiological abnormalities, particularly QT interval prolongation. It is now known that cardiac dysfunction worsens with the progression of cirrhosis. Treatment for CCM has traditionally been limited to supportive efforts, but new pharmacological studies appear promising. Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction in CCM can be improved by targeted heart rate reduction. Ivabradine combined with carvedilol improves left ventricular diastolic dysfunction through targeted heart rate reduction, and this regimen can improve survival in patients with cirrhosis. Orthotopic liver transplantation also appears to improve CCM. Here, we canvass diagnostic challenges associated with CCM, introduce cardiac physiology principles and the application of echocardiographic techniques, and discuss the evidence behind therapeutic interventions in CCM.

Point-of-Care Echocardiography and Hemodynamic Monitoring in Cirrhosis and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the COVID-19 Era

Point-of-Care (POC) transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is transforming the management of patients with cirrhosis presenting with septic shock, acute kidney injury, hepatorenal syndrome and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) by correctly assessing the hemodynamic and volume status at the bedside using combined echocardiography and POC ultrasound (POCUS). When POC TTE is performed by the hepatologist or intensivist in the intensive care unit (ICU), and interpreted remotely by a cardiologist, it can rule out cardiovascular conditions that may be contributing to undifferentiated shock, such as diastolic dysfunction, myocardial infarction, myocarditis, regional wall motion abnormalities and pulmonary embolism. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a delay in seeking medical treatment, reduced invasive interventions and deferment in referrals leading to "collateral damage" in critically ill patients with liver disease. Thus, the use of telemedicine in the ICU (Tele-ICU) has integrated cardiology, intensive care, and hepatology practices across the spectrum of ICU, operating room, and transplant healthcare. Telecardiology tools have improved bedside diagnosis when introduced as part of COVID-19 care by remote supervision and interpretation of POCUS and echocardiographic data. In this review, we present the contemporary approach of using POC echocardiography and offer a practical guide for primary care hepatologists and gastroenterologists for cardiac assessment in critically ill patients with cirrhosis and ACLF. Evidenced based use of Tele-ICU can prevent delay in cardiac diagnosis, optimize safe use of expert resources and ensure timely care in the setting of critically ill cirrhosis, ACLF and liver transplantation in the COVID-19 era.

Long-term Outcomes with Carvedilol versus Propranolol in Patients with Index Variceal Bleed: 6-year Follow-up Study

AIMS AND BACKGROUND

There is limited information on comparison of clinical outcomes with carvedilol for secondary prophylaxis following acute variceal bleed (AVB) when compared with propranolol. We report long-term clinical and safety outcomes of a randomised controlled trial comparing carvedilol with propranolol with respect to reduction in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in patients after AVB.

METHODS

We conducted a post-hoc analysis of patients recruited in an open-label randomized controlled trial comparing carvedilol and propranolol following AVB, and estimated long-term rates of rebleed, survival, additional decompensation events and safety outcomes. Rebleed and other decompensations were compared using competing risks analysis, taking death as competing event, and survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (25 taking carvedilol; 23 propranolol) were followed up for 6 years from randomization. More number of patients on carvedilol had HVPG response when compared with those taking propranolol (72%- carvedilol versus 47.8% propranolol, p = 0.047). Comparable 1-year and 3-year rates of rebleed (16.0% and 24.0% for carvedilol versus 8.9% and 36.7% for propranolol; p = 0.457) and survival (94.7% and 89.0% for carvedilol versus 100.0% and 79.8% for propranolol; p = 0.76) were obtained. New/worsening ascites was more common in those receiving propranolol (69.5% vs 40%; p = 0.04). Other clinical decompensations and complications of liver disease occurred at comparable rates between two groups. Drug-related adverse-events were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Despite higher degree of HVPG response, long-term clinical, survival and safety outcomes in carvedilol are similar to those of propranolol in patients with decompensated cirrhosis after index variceal bleed with the exception of ascites that developed less frequently in patients with carvedilol.

Cirrhotic Cardiomyopathy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy is a syndrome of depressed cardiac function in patients with cirrhosis. We aimed to review the historical background, pathophysiology and pathogenesis, diagnostic definitions, clinical relevance, and management of this syndrome.

RECENT FINDINGS

An inflammatory phenotype underlies the pathogenesis: gut bacterial translocation with endotoxemia stimulates cytokines and cardiodepressant factors, such as nitric oxide and endocannabinoids. Cardiomyocyte plasma membrane biochemical and biophysical changes also play a pathogenic role. These factors lead to impaired beta-adrenergic function. Proposed new echocardiographic criteria for the diagnosis of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy include systolic global longitudinal strain and indices of diastolic dysfunction. Cardiac dysfunction participates in the pathogenesis of hepatorenal syndrome and increased morbidity/mortality of cirrhotic patients to hemorrhage, infection, and surgery, including liver transplantation. There is no specific treatment, although β-adrenergic blockade and supportive management have been proposed, but it needs further study. Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy is a clinically relevant syndrome afflicting patients with established cirrhosis. Optimum management remains unclear, and further study is needed in this area.

Hemodynamic Effects of Adding Simvastatin to Carvedilol for Primary Prophylaxis of Variceal Bleeding: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Beta-blockers are the mainstay agents for portal pressure reduction and to modestly reduce hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). We studied whether addition of simvastatin to carvedilol in cirrhotic patients for primary prophylaxis improves the hemodynamic response.

METHODS

Cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices and with baseline HVPG > 12 mm Hg were prospectively randomized for primary prophylaxis to receive either carvedilol (group A, n = 110) or carvedilol plus simvastatin (group B, n = 110). Primary objective was to compare hemodynamic response (HVPG reduction of ≥20% or <12 mm Hg) at 3 months, and secondary objectives were to compare first bleed episodes, death, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The groups were comparable at baseline. The proportion of patients achieving HVPG response at 3 months was comparable between groups (group A-36/62 [58.1%], group B-36/59 [61%], P = 0.85). The degree of mean HVPG reduction (17.3% and 17.8%, respectively, P = 0.98) and hemodynamic response (odds ratio [OR]: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-1.83, P = 0.74) was also not different between the groups. Patients who achieved target heart rate with no hypotensive episodes in either group showed better hemodynamic response (77.8% vs 59.2%, P = 0.04). Failure to achieve target heart rate (OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.22-1.06) and Child C cirrhosis (OR: 4.49; 95% CI: 1.20-16.8) predicted nonresponse. Three (3.7%) patients on simvastatin developed transient transaminitis and elevated creatine phosphokinase and improved with drug withdrawal. Two patients in each group bled (P = 0.99). Three patients and 1 patient, respectively, in group A and B died (P = 0.32), with sepsis being the cause of death.

DISCUSSION

Addition of simvastatin to carvedilol for 3 months for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding does not improve hemodynamic response over carvedilol monotherapy. Simvastatin usage should be closely monitored for adverse effects in Child C cirrhotic patients.