Open-labeled randomized controlled trial to compare diuretic therapy with recombinant human serum albumin and diuretic therapy for therapeutic treatment of ascites in patients with advanced liver cirrhosis: An exploratory trial

The Renin-Angiotensin System in Liver Disease

The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is a complex homeostatic entity with multiorgan systemic and local effects. Traditionally, RAS works in conjunction with the kidney to control effective arterial circulation, systemic vascular resistance, and electrolyte balance. However, chronic hepatic injury and resulting splanchnic dilation may disrupt this delicate balance. The role of RAS in liver disease, however, is even more extensive, modulating hepatic fibrosis and portal hypertension. Recognition of an alternative RAS pathway in the past few decades has changed our understanding of RAS in liver disease, and the concept of opposing vs. "rebalanced" forces is an ongoing focus of research. Whether RAS inhibition is beneficial in patients with chronic liver disease appears to be context-dependent, but further study is needed to optimize clinical management and reduce organ-specific morbidity and mortality. This review presents the current understanding of RAS in liver disease, acknowledges areas of uncertainty, and describes potential areas of future investigation.

Diuretic effect of co-administration of furosemide and albumin in comparison to furosemide therapy alone: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It has been a matter of much debate whether the co-administration of furosemide and albumin can achieve better diuresis and natriuresis than furosemide treatment alone. There is inconsistency in published trials regarding the effect of this combination therapy. We, therefore, conducted this meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of furosemide and albumin co-administration and the factors potentially influencing the diuretic effect of such co-administration.

METHODS

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched the PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases. Prospective studies with adult populations which comparing the effect of furosemide and albumin co-administration with furosemide alone were included. The outcomes including diuretic effect and natriuresis effect measured by hourly urine output and hourly urine sodium excretion from both groups were extracted. Random effect model was applied for conducting meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity of treatment effects.

RESULTS

By including 13 studies with 422 participants, the meta-analysis revealed that furosemide with albumin co-administration increased urine output by 31.45 ml/hour and increased urine excretion by 1.76 mEq/hour in comparison to furosemide treatment alone. The diuretic effect of albumin and furosemide co-administration was better in participants with low baseline serum albumin levels (< 2.5 g/dL) and high prescribed albumin infusion doses (> 30 g), and the effect was more significant within 12 hours after administration. Diuretic effect of co-administration was better in those with baseline Cr > 1.2 mg/dL and natriuresis effect of co-administration was better in those with baseline eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m2.

CONCLUSION

Co-administration of furosemide with albumin might enhance diuresis and natriuresis effects than furosemide treatment alone but with high heterogeneity in treatment response. According to the present meta-analysis, combination therapy might provide advantages compared to the furosemide therapy alone in patients with baseline albumin levels lower than 2.5 g/dL or in patients receiving higher albumin infusion doses or in patients with impaired renal function. Owing to high heterogeneity and limited enrolled participants, further parallel randomized controlled trials are warranted to examine our outcome.

REGISTRATION

PROSEPRO ID: CRD42020211002; https://clinicaltrials.gov/.

Long-term albumin administration in patients with cirrhosis and ascites: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Ascites is a common complication of cirrhosis, and it is associated with increased mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of long-term albumin administration in decreasing mortality and other complications of patients with cirrhosis and ascites.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE and Embase databases. Randomized controlled trials evaluating long-term albumin administration in patients with cirrhosis and ascites were considered eligible, as long as at least one of the following outcomes was evaluated: mortality, recurrence of ascites/need for paracentesis, refractory ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, hepatic encephalopathy, gastrointestinal bleeding, or adverse events. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model, through the Mantel-Haenszel method. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO platform (CRD42019130078).

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1517 references. Five randomized controlled trials fulfilled the selection criteria and were included in this meta-analysis, involving 716 individuals. Patients receiving long-term albumin had significantly lower risk of recurrence of ascites/need for paracentesis when compared with controls (risk ratio = 0.56, 95% confidence interval = 0.48-0.67, P < 0.00001). There was no evidence of significant difference between the long-term albumin and control groups regarding mortality, refractory ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, hepatic encephalopathy, gastrointestinal bleeding, or adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term albumin administration in patients with cirrhosis and ascites decreases recurrence of ascites/need for paracentesis. At this point, there is no evidence of significant benefits of long-term albumin administration regarding mortality or other complications of cirrhosis.

Treatment for ascites in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 20% of people with cirrhosis develop ascites. Several different treatments are available; including, among others, paracentesis plus fluid replacement, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, aldosterone antagonists, and loop diuretics. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their relative efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for ascites in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for ascites according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until May 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and ascites.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) 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 49 randomised clinical trials (3521 participants) in the review. Forty-two trials (2870 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies, without other features of decompensation, having mainly grade 3 (severe), recurrent, or refractory ascites. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 0.1 to 84 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was low or very low. Approximately 36.8% of participants who received paracentesis plus fluid replacement (reference group, the current standard treatment) died within 11 months. There was no evidence of differences in mortality, adverse events, or liver transplantation in people receiving different interventions compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (very low-certainty evidence). Resolution of ascites at maximal follow-up was higher with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (HR 9.44; 95% CrI 1.93 to 62.68) and adding aldosterone antagonists to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (HR 30.63; 95% CrI 5.06 to 692.98) compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (very low-certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists plus loop diuretics had a higher rate of other decompensation events such as hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (rate ratio 2.04; 95% CrI 1.37 to 3.10) (very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials using paracentesis plus fluid replacement reported health-related quality of life or symptomatic recovery from ascites.

FUNDING

the source of funding for four trials were industries which would benefit from the results of the study; 24 trials received no additional funding or were funded by neutral organisations; and the source of funding for the remaining 21 trials was unclear.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is considerable uncertainty about whether interventions for ascites in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis decrease mortality, adverse events, or liver transplantation compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis and ascites. Based on very low-certainty evidence, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and adding aldosterone antagonists to paracentesis plus fluid replacement may increase the resolution of ascites compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement. Based on very low-certainty evidence, aldosterone antagonists plus loop diuretics may increase the decompensation rate compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement.

Clinical Use of Diuretics in Heart Failure, Cirrhosis, and Nephrotic Syndrome

Diuretics play significant role in pharmacology and treatment options in medicine. This paper aims to review and evaluate the clinical use of diuretics in conditions that lead to fluid overload in the body such as cardiac failure, cirrhosis, and nephrotic syndrome. To know the principles of treatment it is essential to understand the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms that cause the need of diuresis in the human body. Various classes of diuretics exist, each having a unique mode of action. A systemic approach for management is recommended based on the current guidelines, starting from thiazides and proceeding to loop diuretics. The first condition for discussion in the paper is cardiac failure. Treatment of ascites in liver cirrhosis with spironolactone as the primary agent is highlighted with further therapeutic options. Lastly, management choices for nephrotic syndrome are discussed and recommended beginning from basic sodium restriction to combined diuretic therapies. Major side effects are discussed.

Contribution of diuretic therapy with human serum albumin to the management of ascites in patients with advanced liver cirrhosis: A prospective cohort study

The number of available studies on the role of human serum albumin (HSA) in the treatment of cirrhotic ascites is currently limited. In this study, we aimed to investigated the parameters associated with diuretic therapy with HSA in patients with advanced cirrhotic ascites. The patient inclusion criteria were cirrhotic ascites and a serum albumin (Alb) concentration of <3.5 g/dl. A total of 49 patients registered and 38 patients were ultimately included in this study. The enrolled patients were mainly treated with oral spironolactone and furosemide, which were not specified; the HSA amount was also not specified, although the administration period was set to a maximum of 7 days. Our results demonstrated that the administration of HSA significantly increased the serum levels of Alb [0.97 g/dl; two-sided 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83-1.11 g/dl] and decreased body weight (-2.24 kg; 95% CI: -3.06 to -1.43 kg), hematocrit ratio (0.96; 95% CI: 0.94-0.98) and plasma renin concentration (day 4; geometric mean fold change, -0.1528; 95% CI: -0.2510 to -0.0545; log-transformed data) in patients with advanced cirrhotic ascites. The observed weight loss was found to be correlated with the total amount of HSA administered (P=0.0012), as indicated by the results of the multiple linear regression analysis. In conclusion, this study confirmed the efficacy of HSA in patients with advanced cirrhotic ascites.