Meta-analysis: vasoactive medications for the management of acute variceal bleeds

The current applications and future directions of terlipressin

Terlipressin is a vasopressin analog with potent splanchnic vasoconstrictor properties. It has an established role in managing portal hypertensive bleeding and hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury, with a growing body of evidence demonstrating improved safety and efficacy with continuous infusion-based administration compared to bolus dosing. We discuss previously reported adverse effects of terlipressin and evidence-based strategies to maximize the safety of administration. We also review the literature surrounding emerging indications for terlipressin in decompensated cirrhosis, particularly in the management of refractory ascites. Furthermore, we present data on novel ambulatory programs utilizing long-term continuous terlipressin infusion as bridging therapy for liver transplant candidates with recurrent hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury, diuretic-refractory ascites, or hydrothorax.

Abbreviated Duration of Vasoactive Agents Has Similar Outcomes as Standard Duration of Therapy in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis and Variceal Bleeding: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This two-stage individual patient data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) compared the efficacy of a shorter duration (≤ 2 days) of vasoactive (VA) drug therapy to standard duration (3-5 days) after acute variceal bleeding (AVB) in patients with liver cirrhosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Randomized clinical trials on patients with cirrhosis and AVB undergoing endoscopic band ligation which compared a short duration versus the standard duration of VA therapy were included. The primary outcome was 5-day rebleeding rate. Secondary outcomes included 5-day and 42-day mortality, 42-day rebleeding rate, and length of hospital stay in patients receiving short duration of therapy as compared to those receiving standard duration. Aggregate data meta-analysis and IPD-MA of trials were performed for these outcomes and comparisons in patients with different severities of liver disease.

RESULTS

Out of 11 eligible trials, 542 IPD data sets were available from 6 trials. Two hundred and seventy-nine patients received short duration and 263 received standard duration VA therapy. Two-stage IPD-MA revealed no significant differences in the 5-day rebleeding rate (HR = 0.59, 95%CI: 0.19-1.81, p = 0.66), 5-day mortality (HR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.18-6.63, p = 0.44), 42-day rebleeding rate (HR = 0.95, 95%CI: 0.47-1.90, p = 0.90) and 42-day mortality (HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.43-2.56, p = 0.34) between the two groups. One-stage IPD-MA revealed no significant differences in the outcomes across Child-Pugh classes, with shorter hospital stay in short duration group.

CONCLUSIONS

Short duration VA therapy has similar outcomes to standard duration in patients with liver cirrhosis presenting with AVB, irrespective of severity of liver disease.

Portal hypertension: recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Consensus document sponsored by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) and the Biomedical Research Network Centre for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBERehd)

Portal hypertension is a hemodynamic abnormality that complicates the course of cirrhosis, as well as other diseases that affect the portal venous circulation. The development of portal hypertension compromises prognosis, especially when it rises above a certain threshold known as clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). In the consensus conference on Portal Hypertension promoted by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver and the Hepatic and Digestive diseases area of the Biomedical Research Networking Center (CIBERehd), different aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension caused by cirrhosis or other diseases were discussed. The outcome of this discussion was a set of recommendations that achieved varying degrees of consensus among panelists and are reflected in this consensus document. The six areas under discussion were: the relevance of CSPH and the non-invasive methods used for its diagnosis and that of cirrhosis, the prevention of the first episode of decompensation and its recurrence, the treatment of acute variceal bleeding and other complications of portal hypertension, the indications for the use of TIPS, and finally, the diagnosis and treatment of liver vascular diseases.

Portal hypertension: recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Consensus document sponsored by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) and the Biomedical Research Network Center for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBERehd)

Portal hypertension is a hemodynamic abnormality that complicates the course of cirrhosis, as well as other diseases that affect the portal venous circulation. The development of portal hypertension compromises prognosis, especially when it rises above a certain threshold known as clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). In the consensus conference on Portal Hypertension promoted by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver and the Hepatic and Digestive diseases area of the Biomedical Research Networking Center (CIBERehd), different aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension caused by cirrhosis or other diseases were discussed. The outcome of this discussion was a set of recommendations that achieved varying degrees of consensus among panelists and are reflected in this consensus document. The six areas under discussion were: the relevance of clinically significant portal hypertension and the non-invasive methods used for its diagnosis and that of cirrhosis, the prevention of the first episode of decompensation and its recurrence, the treatment of acute variceal bleeding and other complications of portal hypertension, the indications for the use of TIPS, and finally, the diagnosis and treatment of liver vascular diseases.

Effectiveness of Adjunctive Drug Therapy to Endoscopic Stenting in Liver Cirrhosis Complicated by Refractory Variceal Bleeding

AIM OF THE STUDY. Comparative clinical analysis of the efficacy of terlipressin and octreotide as additional drug therapy to mechanical hemostasis with nitinol stent in patients with liver cirrhosis complicated by bleeding from esophageal varices refractory to endoscopic treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS. Thirty-one patients with liver cirrhosis complicated by esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to endoscopic treatment , in whose complex treatment program, as a first-line life­saving measure, hemostasis with a self-expanding hemostasis was performed nitinol stent were randomly assigned to two groups. In group A, 20 patients were treated with terlipressin as an adjuvant to mechanical hemostasis, and in group B, 11 patients were treated with octreotide. Unpaired Student’s t-test was used for statistical analysis of the results. Graphs for assessing the survival function of patients for 8 weeks after the end of treatment were constructed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS. In the acute observation period terlipressin and octreotide were equally effective in treating refractory variceal bleeding. In the subacute observation period, the administration of octreotide was generally accompanied by a greater number of side effects (54.5%) than terlipressin (30.0%) (p=0.453). In the remote observation period, 8-week survival in the group of patients receiving terlipressin was higher than in the group of patients receiving octreotide.

CONCLUSION. Terlipressin is as effective as octreotide as an adjunct to endoscopic stenting in drug therapy for liver cirrhosis complicated by esophageal variceal bleeding refractory to endoscopic treatment. At the same time, terlipressin has a greater effect than octreotide on reducing 8-week mortality, which approaches statistical significance. In this regard, terlipressin may be the vasoactive drug of choice in acute refractory variceal bleeding.

Outcomes in Variceal Bleeding Associated With Continuous Octreotide in Patients With Delayed Endoscopy

Background: Variceal hemorrhage treatment includes endoscopy within 12 hours of admission and octreotide therapy for 2-5 days post-endoscopy. Duration of pre-endoscopy octreotide can be prolonged when intervention is delayed. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of extended pre-endoscopy octreotide on rebleeding after endoscopy when comparing short vs long durations of post-endoscopy octreotide. Methods: This was a single center, retrospective cohort evaluating adult cirrhotic patients with esophageal variceal hemorrhage admitted between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2020. Study groups included patients receiving octreotide ≥12 hours prior to endoscopy followed by ≤ 48 (short course) or >48 hours (standard course) after endoscopy. The primary outcome was post-endoscopy rebleeding, defined as hemoglobin decrease of ≥2 g/dL from baseline or the requirement of ≥1 unit of packed red blood cells. Results: Of the 169 patients included, 88 patients received short course octreotide after endoscopy, and 81 patients received standard course octreotide after endoscopy. Twenty-nine (33%) patients in the short course group and 43 (53.1%) in the standard course group experienced the primary endpoint (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.24 - 4.29; P = .008). Conclusion: Extended pre-endoscopy octreotide may be beneficial in preventing rebleeding when intervention is delayed. Further studies are needed to determine the necessary octreotide duration in delayed endoscopy and varying bleeding risk.

Octreotide versus Terlipressin as Adjuvant to Endoscopic Variceal Band Ligation in Bleeding Oesophageal Varices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is a critical complication of portal hypertension, contributing significantly to mortality worldwide. Pharmacological interventions, including terlipressin and octreotide, have evolved to manage AVB, yet consensus on their comparative effectiveness remains elusive. This study conducts a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing terlipressin and octreotide in the management of AVB, aiming to provide insights into their relative benefits. Methods: This study included RCTs with head-to-head comparisons of terlipressin and octreotide. The search strategy covered PubMed, Scopus, and Cinahl databases, and the included studies involved adult patients with confirmed AVB undergoing endoscopic variceal band ligation (EVBL). Results: Seven RCTs meeting inclusion criteria were included in the meta-analysis. The assessed outcomes were: achieving haemostasis within 24 h, rebleeding rate, and mortality rate. The pooled analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between terlipressin and octreotide in achieving haemostasis (OR: 1.30, p = 0.23), rebleeding rates at 5 days (OR: 0.7, p = 0.23), and mortality at 42 days (OR: 0.9, p > 0.5). Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that terlipressin and octreotide exhibit similar efficacy in reducing bleeding, rebleeding rates, and mortality when used as adjuvants to EVBL in AVB. Clinicians are encouraged to consider individual patient characteristics and the broader clinical context when choosing between these agents. Future research should focus on addressing existing evidence gaps and enhancing understanding of variables influencing EVBL outcomes.

Acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding management in older people taking or not taking anticoagulants: a literature review

Acute upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding may be a potentially life-threatening event that requires prompt recognition and an early effective management, being responsible for a considerable number of hospital admissions. Methods. We perform a clinical review to summarize the recent international guidelines, helping the physician in clinical practice. Older people are a vulnerable subgroup of patients more prone to developing GI bleeding because of several comorbidities and polypharmacy, especially related to an increased use of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs. In addition, older patients may have higher peri-procedural risk that should be evaluated. The recent introduction of reversal strategies may help the management of GI bleeding in this subgroup of patients. In this review, we aimed to (1) summarize the epidemiology and risk factors for upper and lower GI bleeding, (2) describe treatment options with a focus on pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of different proton pump inhibitors, and (3) provide an overview of the clinical management with flowcharts for risk stratification and treatment. In conclusion, GI is common in older patients and an early effective management may be helpful in the reduction of several complications.

Review article: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding - review of current evidence and implications for management

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common emergency requiring hospital-based care. Advances in care across pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases have led to improvements in clinical outcomes.

AIMS

To provide a detailed, evidence-based update on major aspects of care across pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases.

METHODS

We performed a structured bibliographic database search for each topic. If a recent high-quality meta-analysis was not available, we performed a meta-analysis with random effects methods and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Pre-endoscopic management of UGIB includes risk stratification, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion policy unless the patient has cardiovascular disease, and pharmacologic therapy with erythromycin and a proton pump inhibitor. Patients with cirrhosis should be treated with prophylactic antibiotics and vasoactive medications. Tranexamic acid should not be used. Endoscopic management of UGIB depends on the aetiology. For peptic ulcer disease (PUD) with high-risk stigmata, endoscopic therapy, including over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) and TC-325 powder spray, should be performed. For variceal bleeding, treatment should be customised by severity and anatomic location. Post-endoscopic management includes early enteral feeding for all UGIB patients. For high-risk PUD, PPI should be continued for 72 h, and rebleeding should initially be evaluated with a repeat endoscopy. For variceal bleeding, high-risk patients or those with further bleeding, a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt can be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of acute UGIB should include treatment plans for pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases of care, and customise treatment decisions based on aetiology and severity of bleeding.

Massive Transfusion Protocol and Outcome of Patients with Acute Variceal Bleeding

Background/Aims: The massive transfusion protocol (MTP) can improve the outcomes of trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock and some patients with non-traumatic hemorrhagic shock. However, no information is available regarding whether MTP can improve the outcomes of acute variceal bleeding (AVB). This study aimed to determine the effects of MTP on the outcomes of patients with AVB. Methods: Consecutive patients (n = 218) with AVB who did not have current malignancy and visited the emergency room between July 2014 and June 2022 were analyzed. 42-day mortality and failure to control the bleeding were compared between patients with and without MTP activation. Additionally, propensity-score matching was conducted. Results: The amount of blood product transfused was higher in the MTP group. The 42-day mortality rate (42.1% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001) and the rate of failure to control bleeding (36.8% vs. 0.5%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in those who received blood transfusions by MTP. MTP was an independent factor associated with 42-day mortality in the multivariable-adjusted analysis (HR 21.05; 95% CI 3.07-144.21, p = 0.002, HR 24.04; 95% CI 3.41-169.31, p = 0.001). The MTP group showed consistently higher 42-day mortality and failure to control bleeding in all subgroup analyses, stratified by systolic blood pressure, hemoglobin level, and the model for end-stage liver disease score. The MTP group also showed higher 42-day mortality (42.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.001) and failure to control bleeding (42.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.001) in a propensity score-matched analysis (n = 52). Conclusions: MTP was associated with poor outcomes in patients with AVB. Further studies are needed to see whether MTP can be an option for patients with massive AVB.

Assessment, Resuscitation and Medical Management of Variceal and Nonvariceal Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) continues to be an important cause for emergency room visits and carries significant morbidity and mortality. Early resuscitative measures form the basis of the management of patients presenting with UGIB and can improve the outcomes of such patients including lowering mortality. In this review, using an evidence-based approach, we discuss the initial assessment and resuscitation of patients presenting with UGIB including identifying clues from history and physical examination to confirm UGIB, preendoscopic risk assessment tools, the role of early fluid resuscitation, utilization of blood products, use of pharmacologic interventions, and the optimal timing of endoscopy.

Intravenous metoclopramide for increasing endoscopic mucosal visualization in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

Acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) is the most common emergency condition that requires rapid endoscopic treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of pre-endoscopic intravenous metoclopramide on endoscopic mucosal visualization (EMV) in patients with acute UGIH. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind controlled trial of participants diagnosed with acute UGIH. All participants underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy within 24 h. Participants were assigned to either the metoclopramide or placebo group. Modified Avgerinos scores were evaluated during endoscopy. In total, 284 out of 300 patients completed the per-protocol procedure. The mean age was 62.8 ± 14.3 years, and 67.6% were men. Metoclopramide group achieved a higher total EMV and gastric body EMV score than the other group (7.34 ± 1.1 vs 6.94 ± 1.6; P = 0.017 and 1.80 ± 0.4 vs 1.64 ± 0.6; P = 0.006, respectively). Success in identifying lesions was not different between the groups (96.5% in metoclopramide and 93.6% in placebo group; P = 0.26). In the metoclopramide group, those with active variceal bleeding compared with the control group demonstrated substantial improvements in gastric EMV (1.83 ± 0.4 vs 1.28 ± 0.8, P = 0.004), antral EMV (1.96 ± 0.2 vs 1.56 ± 0.6, P = 0.003), and total EMV score (7.48 ± 1.1 vs 6.2 ± 2.3, P = 0.02). Pre-endoscopic intravenous metoclopramide improved the quality of EMV in variceal etiologies of UGIH, which was especially prominent in those who had signs of active bleeding based on nasogastric tube assessment.Trial Registration: Trial was registered in Clinical Trials: TCTR 20210708004 (08/07/2021).

Real-world comparison of terlipressin vs. octreotide as an adjuvant treatment in the management of variceal bleeding

Variceal bleeding is a major complication and the leading cause of death in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of terlipressin vs octreotide as an adjuvant to endoscopic management of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding in a real-time scenario. We reviewed the medical records of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding from January 2005 to December 2020 at our tertiary care Aga Khan University Hospital. Mortality was assessed after 6 weeks. A total of 842 patients with variceal bleed were evaluated. 624 patients (74.1%) and 218 patients (25.9%) received Terlipressin and Octreotide respectively. On multiple regression analysis, cardiac events during hospital stay (OR: 11.22), presence of Porto-systemic encephalopathy (OR: 3.79), and elevated bilirubin levels at the time of presentation were found to be independent risk factors for increased six weeks mortality. Moreover, cardiac events during hospital stay (OR: 3.26), Porto-systemic encephalopathy at presentation (OR: 3.06), and octreotide administration (OR: 1.80) were identified as independent risk factors for increased length of hospital stay. Terlipressin and Octreotide have similar outcomes in terms of control of bleeding, hospital stay, mortality, and side effects when used as adjuvant therapy for the management of variceal bleeding.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Use of Vasoactive Drugs and Intravenous Albumin in Cirrhosis: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Cirrhosis is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States and worldwide. It consists of compensated, decompensated, and further decompensated stages; median survival is more than 15 years, 2 years, and 9 months for each stage, respectively. With each stage, there is progressive worsening of portal hypertension and the vasodilatory-hyperdynamic circulatory state, resulting in a progressive decrease in effective arterial blood volume and renal perfusion. Vasoconstrictors reduce portal pressure via splanchnic vasoconstriction and are used in the management of variceal hemorrhage. Intravenous (IV) albumin increases effective arterial blood volume and is used in the prevention of acute kidney injury (AKI) and death after large-volume paracentesis and in patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). The combination of vasoconstrictors and albumin is used in the reversal of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS-AKI), the most lethal complication of cirrhosis. Because a potent vasoconstrictor, terlipressin, was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, and because recent trials have explored use of IV albumin in other settings, it was considered that a best practice update would be relevant regarding the use of vasoactive drugs and IV albumin in the following 3 specific scenarios: variceal hemorrhage, ascites and SBP, and HRS.

METHODS

This expert review was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership. It underwent internal peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Some of the statements are unchanged from published guidelines because of lack of new evidence in the literature. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality and evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Vasoactive drugs should be initiated as soon as the diagnosis of variceal hemorrhage is suspected or confirmed, preferably before diagnostic and/or therapeutic endoscopy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: After initial endoscopic hemostasis, vasoactive drugs should be continued for 2-5 days to prevent early rebleeding. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Octreotide is the vasoactive drug of choice in the management of variceal hemorrhage based on its safety profile. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: IV albumin should be administered at the time of large-volume (>5 L) paracentesis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: IV albumin may be considered in patients with SBP. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Albumin should not be used in patients (hospitalized or not) with cirrhosis and uncomplicated ascites. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Vasoconstrictors should not be used in the management of uncomplicated ascites, after large-volume paracentesis or in patients with SBP. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: IV albumin is the volume expander of choice in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and ascites presenting with AKI. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Vasoactive drugs (eg, terlipressin, norepinephrine, and combination of octreotide and midodrine) should be used in the treatment of HRS-AKI, but not in other forms of AKI in cirrhosis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Terlipressin is the vasoactive drug of choice in the treatment of HRS-AKI and use of concurrent albumin can be considered when accounting for patient's volume status. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Terlipressin treatment does not require intensive care unit monitoring and can be administered intravenously through a peripheral line. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Terlipressin use is contraindicated in patients with hypoxemia and in patients with ongoing coronary, peripheral, or mesenteric ischemia, and should be used with caution in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure grade 3. The benefits may not outweigh the risks in patients with serum creatinine >5 mg/dL and in patients listed for transplantation with a Model for End-stage Liver Disease ≥35.

CURRENT PHARMACOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT IN UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common reason for presentation to the hospital. Appropriate resuscitation followed by endoscopic assessment and endotherapy for high-risk lesions (active bleeding or non-bleeding with visible vessels) forms the cornerstone of management. Pharmacological therapies are utilised at each stage of management in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding. Proton pump inhibitors and prokinetic agents can be administered pre-endoscopically with vasoactive medication and antibiotics utilised in suspected variceal bleeding. Epinephrine may be used as a temporising measure to improve visualisation during endoscopy but should not applied as a single agent. Topical endoscopic therapies have also shown promise in achieving haemostasis. Following endoscopy, a high dose of proton pump inhibitor should be given to patients who require endotherapy and vasoactive medications, and antibiotics continued in confirmed variceal bleeds. The timing of resumption of antithrombotic medication is dependent on the agent utilised and underlying thrombotic risk.

Continuous vs. intermittent terlipressin infusion for portal hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Portal hypertension, a major complication of chronic liver disease, often leads to life-threatening variceal bleeding, managed effectively with vasoactive drugs like terlipressin. However, the most optimal method of terlipressin administration, continuous versus intermittent infusion, remains a subject of debate, necessitating this systematic review and meta-analysis for evidence-based decision-making in managing this critical condition.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to the PRISMA standards and explored multiple databases until 6 April 2023, such as MEDLINE through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and CENTRAL. Independent reviewers selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met specific inclusion criteria. After assessing study quality and extracting necessary data, statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager (RevMan), with results presented as risk ratios (RR) or mean differences.

Results

Five RCTs (n=395 patients) were included. The continuous terlipressin group had a significantly lower risk of rebleeding (RR=0.43, P=0.0004) and treatment failure (RR=0.22, P=0.02) and fewer total adverse effects (RR=0.52, P<0.00001) compared to the intermittent group. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in mean arterial pressure (P=0.26), length of hospital stays (P=0.78), and mortality rates (P=0.65).

Conclusion

This study provides robust evidence suggesting that continuous terlipressin infusion may be superior to intermittent infusions in reducing the risk of rebleeding, treatment failure, and adverse effects in patients with portal hypertension. However, further large-scale, high-quality RCTs are required to confirm these findings and to investigate the potential benefits of continuous terlipressin infusion on mortality and hospital stays.

Terlipressin in the management of liver disease

INTRODUCTION

Terlipressin is a synthetic vasopressin analog which has been recently approved in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome. Terlipressin stimulates vasopressin receptors located on the smooth muscle vasculature of the splanchnic circulation and renal tubules which results in splanchnic vasoconstriction with improved renal perfusion and antidiuretic activity, respectively.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we discuss available data regarding the FDA approved use of terlipressin, safety, and tolerability, as well as highlight alternative uses in chronic liver disease currently still under investigation.

EXPERT OPINION

Terlipressin is more efficacious compared to other vasoactive agents including midodrine octreotide and norepinephrine in reversal of hepatorenal syndrome and improves short-term survival. Other potential applications of terlipressin's vasoconstrictor actions reported in the literature include management of variceal hemorrhage and other complications of portal hypertension.

Trends in Hospitalizations of Esophageal Varices From 2011 to 2018: A United States Nationwide Study

Background

Prevalence of gastroesophageal varices is around 50% of patients with cirrhosis. In compensated cirrhosis they are present in 30-40%. Progression from small to large varices occurs at rate of 10-12% annually. That percentage increases significantly in decompensated liver cirrhosis with gastroesophageal varices found in 85% of patients. Variceal hemorrhage occurs at a rate around 10-15% per year. The outcome of variceal hemorrhage depends on the severity of liver disease, size of varices, and presence of stigmata of recent bleeding (red whale sign). Six-week mortality of variceal hemorrhage ranges between 15% and 25%. Without treatment, variceal hemorrhage tends to recur in 60% of patients within 1 - 2 years. The aim of the study was to assess demographics of esophageal varices with and without bleeding, geographic distribution, comorbidities, outcomes, main payers, and cost of hospitalizations.

Methods

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from year 2011 to 2018 was used. Patients who had a primary diagnosis of esophageal varices with or without bleeding were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes (456.0 for esophageal varices with bleeding, and 456.1 for esophageal varices without bleeding), and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes (I85.01 for esophageal varices with bleeding, and I85.00 for esophageal varices without bleeding) in the first two discharge diagnoses. The propensity score to calculate the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) to adjust between the differences of the compared groups was implemented. Two groups were compared in terms of their hospitalization outcomes, including LOS, hospital charges, hospital mortality, and disposition.

Results

A total of 322,761 patients were admitted with esophageal varices between 2011 and 2018, with 236,802 (73.6%) had bleeding esophageal varices and 85,959 (26.4%) had nonbleeding esophageal varices. The majority of the patients from both groups were white (66%), covered with Medicare (38% in the esophageal varices with bleeding vs. 41% in the nonbleeding group). There was a steady increase of patients admitted with nonbleeding esophageal varices. Most common comorbidities were liver diseases, alcohol abuse, uncomplicated hypertension and depression in both groups. There were no significant changes in OLS over the years in both groups, but there was a significant increase in hospital charges, especially in the patients with bleeding esophageal varices starting in 2015, and no change in mortality throughout the years. Regarding hospital disposition, there was a notable decline in rehab discharge in the bleeding esophageal varices group.

Conclusions

Esophageal varices with and without bleeding have been steadily increasing since the beginning of this century. This may result in a substantial impact on increasing health care costs and utilization due to acute variceal hemorrhage. Odds of death, transfer to urban hospital, and transfer to visiting nursing assistance remained unchanged.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU.

DESIGN

The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development.

INTERVENTIONS

In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI < 30 kg/m2] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] > 10 mmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography > 25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70 g/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1 g/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250 mg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C  ≤ 13 or Child-Pugh B > 7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG > 20 mmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

Gastrointestinal Emergencies and the Role of Endoscopy

Many gastrointestinal (GI) disorders present to the emergency room with acute clinical presentations, some even life threatening. Common emergencies encountered that require urgent endoscopic interventions include GI hemorrhage (variceal and nonvariceal), foreign body ingestion, obstructive jaundice, postprocedure-related complications such as postpolypectomy bleed or perforation, etc. A major advantage of emergency endoscopy is that it is cost effective and, on many occasions, can be life-saving. The present review will highlight a practical approach on various endoscopic modalities and their use in the GI emergencies.

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.

Management of varices and variceal hemorrhage in liver cirrhosis: a recent update

Cirrhosis consists of two main stages: compensated (asymptomatic) and decompensated, the latter with a higher mortality. Variceal hemorrhage, together with ascites or encephalopathy, or both, are events that define cirrhosis decompensation and are driven by portal hypertension. The approach and management of patients with compensated cirrhosis has been mostly focused on preventing variceal hemorrhage in those who have high-risk varices on endoscopy. Recent studies suggest a paradigm shift aimed at preventing all decompensating events, not only variceal hemorrhage, in patients with cirrhosis and clinically significant portal hypertension identified via noninvasive measures such as liver stiffness and platelet count. In these patients, nonselective beta-blockers have been shown to prevent ascites (the most common decompensating event) and variceal growth. Variceal hemorrhage has a high mortality rate and even though advances in diagnostic approach and standard of care over the past decades have led to a decrease in mortality, it is still high with a 6-week mortality rate of 15-20%. Survival has improved with the preemptive placement of the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in patients at high risk of failing standard therapy. In this review, we provide an overview of the pathophysiology and bases for therapy of portal hypertension and varices, the diagnostic approach and management of compensated cirrhosis with clinically significant portal hypertension, and the management of acute variceal hemorrhage as well as prevention strategies for variceal hemorrhage recurrence.

Management of Decompensated Cirrhosis and Associated Syndromes

Patients with cirrhosis account for 3% of intensive care unit admissions with hospital mortality exceeding 50%; however, improvements in survival among patients with acutely decompensated cirrhosis and organ failure have been described when treated in specialized liver transplant centers. Acute-on-chronic liver failure is a distinct clinical syndrome characterized by decompensated cirrhosis associated with one or more organ failures resulting in a significantly higher short-term mortality. In this review, we will discuss the management of common life-threatening complications in the patient with cirrhosis that require intensive care management including neurologic, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, pulmonary, and renal complications.

Liver cirrhosis

Cirrhosis is widely prevalent worldwide and can be a consequence of different causes, such as obesity, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, high alcohol consumption, hepatitis B or C infection, autoimmune diseases, cholestatic diseases, and iron or copper overload. Cirrhosis develops after a long period of inflammation that results in replacement of the healthy liver parenchyma with fibrotic tissue and regenerative nodules, leading to portal hypertension. The disease evolves from an asymptomatic phase (compensated cirrhosis) to a symptomatic phase (decompensated cirrhosis), the complications of which often result in hospitalisation, impaired quality of life, and high mortality. Progressive portal hypertension, systemic inflammation, and liver failure drive disease outcomes. The management of liver cirrhosis is centred on the treatment of the causes and complications, and liver transplantation can be required in some cases. In this Seminar, we discuss the disease burden, pathophysiology, and recommendations for the diagnosis and management of cirrhosis and its complications. Future challenges include better screening for early fibrosis or cirrhosis, early identification and reversal of causative factors, and prevention of complications.

Management of portal hypertensive upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Report of the Coorg Consensus workshop of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology Task Force on Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Portal hypertensive bleeding is a major complication of portal hypertension (PHT) with high morbidity and mortality. A lot of advances have been made in our understanding of screening, risk stratification, and management strategies for portal hypertensive bleeding including acute variceal bleeding leading to improved overall outcomes in patients with PHT. A number of guidelines on variceal bleeding have been published by various societies in the past few years. The Indian Society of Gastroenterology (ISG) Task Force on Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB) felt that it was necessary to bring out a standard practice guidance document for the use of Indian health care providers especially physicians, gastroenterologists, and hepatologists. For this purpose, an expert group meeting was convened by the ISG Task Force to deliberate on this matter and write a consensus guidance document for Indian practice. The delegates including gastroenterologists, hepatologists, radiologists, and surgeons from different parts of the country participated in the consensus development meeting at Coorg in 2018. A core group was constituted which reviewed all published literature on portal hypertensive UGIB with special reference to the Indian scenario and prepared unambiguous statements on different aspects for voting and consensus in the whole group. This consensus was produced through a modified Delphi process and reflects our current understanding and recommendations for the diagnosis and management of portal hypertensive UGIB in Indians. Intended for use by the health care providers especially gastroenterologists and hepatologists, these consensus statements provide an evidence-based approach to risk stratification, diagnosis, and management of patients with portal hypertensive bleeding.

[Diagnosis and Management of Esophageal and Gastric Variceal Bleeding: Focused on 2019 KASL Clinical Practice Guidelines for Liver Cirrhosis]

Varices are a frequent complication of liver cirrhosis and a major cause of mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis complications have a poor prognosis and require careful management. Portal hypertension is the most common complication of liver cirrhosis, which is the key determinant for varices development. Increased intrahepatic vascular resistance to portal flow leads to the development of portal hypertension. Collateral vessels develop at the communication site between the systemic and portal circulation with the progression of portal hypertension. Varices are the representative collaterals, develop gradually with the progression of portal hypertension and may eventually rupture. Variceal bleeding is a major consequence of portal hypertension and causes the death of cirrhotic patients. The present paper reviews the latest knowledge regarding the diagnosis and management of esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding.

Recent Advances in the Management of Acute Variceal Hemorrhage

Gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the most relevant causes of death in patients with cirrhosis and clinically significant portal hypertension, with gastroesophageal varices being the most frequent source of hemorrhage. Despite survival has improved thanks to the standardization on medical treatment aiming to decrease portal hypertension and prevent infections, mortality remains significant. In this review, our goal is to discuss the most recent advances in the management of esophageal variceal hemorrhage in cirrhosis with specific attention to the treatment algorithms involving the use of indirect measurement of portal pressure (HVPG) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), which aim to further reduce mortality in high-risk patients after acute variceal hemorrhage and in the setting of secondary prophylaxis.

Fresh frozen plasma transfusion in acute variceal haemorrhage: Results from a multicentre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusion is often used in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage (AVH) despite best practice advice suggesting otherwise.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated if FFP transfusion affects clinical outcomes in AVH.

DESIGN, SETTING AND PATIENTS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of 244 consecutive, eligible patients admitted to five tertiary health care centres between 2013 and 2018 with AVH.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Multivariable regression analyses were used to study the association of FFP transfusion with mortality at 42 days (primary outcome) and failure to control bleeding at 5 days and length of stay (secondary outcomes).

RESULTS

Patients who received FFP transfusion (n = 100) had higher mean Model for End Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and more severe variceal bleeding than those who did not received FFP transfusion (n = 144). Multivariable analysis showed that FFP transfusion was associated with increased odds of mortality at 42 days (odds ratio [OR] 9.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.71-23.90). FFP transfusion was also associated with failure to control bleeding at 5 days (OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.28-11.70) and length of stay >7 days (adjusted OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.03-3.42). The independent association of FFP transfusion with mortality at 42 days persisted when the cohort was restricted to high-risk patients and in patients without active bleeding.

LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Fresh frozen plasma transfusion in AVH is independently associated with poor clinical outcomes. As this an observational study, there may be residual bias due to confounding; however, we demonstrate no benefit and potential harm with FFP transfusions in AVH.

Clinical algorithms for the prevention of variceal bleeding and rebleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis

Portal hypertension (PH), a common complication of liver cirrhosis, results in development of esophageal varices. When esophageal varices rupture, they cause significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding with mortality rates up to 20% despite state-of-the-art treatment. Thus, prophylactic measures are of utmost importance to improve outcomes of patients with PH. Several high-quality studies have demonstrated that non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) or endoscopic band ligation (EBL) are effective for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. In secondary prophylaxis, a combination of NSBB + EBL should be routinely used. Once esophageal varices develop and variceal bleeding occurs, standardized treatment algorithms should be followed to minimize bleeding-associated mortality. Special attention should be paid to avoidance of overtransfusion, early initiation of vasoconstrictive therapy, prophylactic antibiotics and early endoscopic therapy. Pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt should be used in all Child C10-C13 patients experiencing variceal bleeding, and potentially in Child B patients with active bleeding at endoscopy. The use of carvedilol, safety of NSBBs in advanced cirrhosis (i.e. with refractory ascites) and assessment of hepatic venous pressure gradient response to NSBB is discussed. In the present review, we give an overview on the rationale behind the latest guidelines and summarize key papers that have led to significant advances in the field.

Diagnosis and management of extrahepatic oesophageal variceal bleed in children in a low resourced setting

Extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) is a major cause of portal hypertension (PH) in children. Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is the most common cause accounting for up to 75% of cases in developing countries. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is the most dreaded and commonest presentation of portal hypertension. Successful treatment of paediatric PH, though challenging is performed in resource constraint countries.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for Liver Cirrhosis 2020

The first edition of the clinical practice guidelines for liver cirrhosis was published in 2010, and the second edition was published in 2015 by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE). The revised third edition was recently published in 2020. This version has become a joint guideline by the JSGE and the Japan Society of Hepatology (JSH). In addition to the clinical questions (CQs), background questions (BQs) are new items for basic clinical knowledge, and future research questions (FRQs) are newly added clinically important items. Concerning the clinical treatment of liver cirrhosis, new findings have been reported over the past 5 years since the second edition. In this revision, we decided to match the international standards as much as possible by referring to the latest international guidelines. Newly developed agents for various complications have also made great progress. In comparison with the latest global guidelines, such as the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), we are introducing data based on the evidence for clinical practice in Japan. The flowchart for nutrition therapy was reviewed to be useful for daily medical care by referring to overseas guidelines. We also explain several clinically important items that have recently received focus and were not mentioned in the last editions. This digest version describes the issues related to the management of liver cirrhosis and several complications in clinical practice. The content begins with a diagnostic algorithm, the revised flowchart for nutritional therapy, and refracted ascites, which are of great importance to patients with cirrhosis. In addition to the updated antiviral therapy for hepatitis B and C liver cirrhosis, the latest treatments for non-viral cirrhosis, such as alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (ASH/NASH) and autoimmune-related cirrhosis, are also described. It also covers the latest evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of liver cirrhosis complications, namely gastrointestinal bleeding, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome and acute kidney injury, hepatic encephalopathy, portal thrombus, sarcopenia, muscle cramp, thrombocytopenia, pruritus, hepatopulmonary syndrome, portopulmonary hypertension, and vitamin D deficiency, including BQ, CQ and FRQ. Finally, this guideline covers prognosis prediction and liver transplantation, especially focusing on several new findings since the last version. Since this revision is a joint guideline by both societies, the same content is published simultaneously in the official English journal of JSGE and JSH.

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for liver cirrhosis 2020

The first edition of the clinical practice guidelines for liver cirrhosis was published in 2010, and the second edition was published in 2015 by the Japanese Society of Gastroenterology (JSGE). The revised third edition was recently published in 2020. This version has become a joint guideline by the JSGE and the Japanese Society of Hepatology (JSH). In addition to the clinical questions (CQs), background questions (BQs) are new items for basic clinical knowledge, and future research questions (FRQs) are newly added clinically important items. Concerning the clinical treatment of liver cirrhosis, new findings have been reported over the past 5 years since the second edition. In this revision, we decided to match the international standards as much as possible by referring to the latest international guidelines. Newly developed agents for various complications have also made great progress. In comparison with the latest global guidelines, such as the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD), we are introducing data based on the evidence for clinical practice in Japan. The flowchart for nutrition therapy was reviewed to be useful for daily medical care by referring to overseas guidelines. We also explain several clinically important items that have recently received focus and were not mentioned in the last editions. This digest version describes the issues related to the management of liver cirrhosis and several complications in clinical practice. The content begins with a diagnostic algorithm, the revised flowchart for nutritional therapy, and refracted ascites, which are of great importance to patients with cirrhosis. In addition to the updated antiviral therapy for hepatitis B and C liver cirrhosis, the latest treatments for non-viral cirrhosis, such as alcoholic steatohepatitis/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (ASH/NASH) and autoimmune-related cirrhosis, are also described. It also covers the latest evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of liver cirrhosis complications, namely gastrointestinal bleeding, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome and acute kidney injury, hepatic encephalopathy, portal thrombus, sarcopenia, muscle cramp, thrombocytopenia, pruritus, hepatopulmonary syndrome, portopulmonary hypertension, and vitamin D deficiency, including BQ, CQ and FRQ. Finally, this guideline covers prognosis prediction and liver transplantation, especially focusing on several new findings since the last version. Since this revision is a joint guideline by both societies, the same content is published simultaneously in the official English journal of JSGE and JSH.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Management of Bleeding Gastric Varices: Expert Review

Management of bleeding gastric varices (GV) presents a unique challenge for patients with portal hypertension. Despite over thirty years of diagnostic and treatment advances standardized practices for bleeding GV are lacking and unsupported by adequate evidence. There are no definitive natural history studies to help with risk assessment or prospective clinical trials to guide clinical decision making. Available literature on the natural history and management of gastric varices consists of case series, restricted cohort studies, and a few small randomized trials, all of which have significant selection biases. This review summarizes the available data and recommendations based on expert opinion on how best to diagnose and manage bleeding from gastric varices. Table 1 summarizes our recommendations.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in patients treated with a balloon tamponade for variceal hemorrhage without response to high doses of vasoactive drugs: A real-world multicenter retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and non-TIPS therapy (endoscopy and/or nonselective beta-blockers [NSBB]) in patients with cirrhosis and active variceal hemorrhage who did not respond to high-dose vasoactive drugs and required balloon tamponade for hemostasis.

METHODS

Medical records of cirrhotic patients who did not respond to high-dose vasoactive drugs and required balloon tamponade for hemostasis at five university hospitals in China between January 2011 and December 2018 were reviewed. Treatment outcomes were compared between the TIPS and the non-TIPS groups.

RESULTS

Treatment failure of variceal hemorrhage within 5 days was reported in six patients of the non-TIPS group (N = 70) and none of the TIPS group (N = 66) (P = .028). The TIPS group had a higher 1-year variceal rebleeding-free rate compared with the non-TIPS group (95.5% vs 60.0%, P < .001). One patient treated with TIPS and nine with non-TIPS therapy experienced rebleeding within 5 days and 6 weeks after the intervention (P = .009). The cumulative 1-year survival rate was higher in the TIPS group than in the non-TIPS group (93.9% vs 78.6%, P = .01). The TIPS group had a higher incidence of hepatic encephalopathy within one year compared with the non-TIPS group (18.2% vs 4.3%, P = .026).

CONCLUSION

For patients with cirrhosis and active variceal bleeding who do not respond to high-dose vasoactive agents and require a balloon tamponade for hemostasis, TIPS may be an appropriate treatment choice.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiologic Management of Portal Hypertension

Cirrhosis is a heterogeneous disease that cannot be studied as a single entity and is classified in two main prognostic stages: compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Portal hypertension, characterized by a pathological increase of the portal pressure and by the formation of portal-systemic collaterals that bypass the liver, is the initial and main consequence of cirrhosis and is responsible for the majority of its complications. A myriad of treatment options exists for appropriately managing the most common complications of portal hypertension, including acute variceal bleeding and refractory ascites. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Updated strategies in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the most recent studies regarding the management of acute esophageal variceal haemorrhage.

RECENT FINDINGS

New randomized control trials and meta-analyses confirmed the role of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage in Child-Pugh C (10-13) and B patients with active bleeding. A recent randomized controlled trial focused on the duration of vasoactive therapy showed no difference between 2 and 5 days of octreotide. A randomized trial showed decreased use of blood products for the correction of coagulopathy using a thromboelastography-guided approach (vs. conventional parameters) as well as decreased bleeding rates when compared with standard of care. A meta-analysis found that for rescue of variceal bleeding, self-expanding metallic stents were more efficacious and safer than balloon tamponade. In addition, studies showed that Child-Pugh C patients and those with hepatic vein pressure gradient more than 20 were at the highest risk of treatment failure, while model for end-stage liver disease was highly predictive of in-hospital mortality.

SUMMARY

In patients with severe coagulopathy and uncontrolled bleeding, TEG-based transfusion strategies are recommended. Antibiotics should be used for all cirrhotic patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, but should be tailored in accordance to local resistance patterns. Early TIPS for high-risk patients has been shown to have a significant survival benefit. Certain aspects of the management of variceal bleeding remain poorly studied such as the role of early TIPS in Child-B patients as well as strategies for rescue therapy in patients who are not TIPS candidates, and require further investigation.

The pharmacodynamic effect of terlipressin versus high-dose octreotide in reducing hepatic venous pressure gradient: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Vasoactive drugs can reduce portal venous pressure and control variceal bleeding. However, few studies have explored the hemodynamic effects of terlipressin and high-dose octreotide in such patients. Our purpose was to evaluate the hemodynamic changes and safety of using terlipressin and high-dose octreotide in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis.

Methods

A multi-center randomized controlled trial was conducted. Cirrhotic patients with a history of variceal bleeding were included. Terlipressin or high-dose octreotide was administered during the procedure of measuring hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). Hemodynamic parameters and symptoms were recorded.

Results

A total of 88 patients were included. HVPG was significantly reduced at 10, 20, and 30 min after drug administration in the terlipressin group (16.3±6.4 vs. 14.7±5.9, 14.0±6.1, and 13.8±6.1, respectively, P<0.001) and the high-dose octreotide group (17.4±6.6 vs. 15.1±5.8, 15.3±6.2, and 16.1±6.0, respectively P<0.01). Decreased heart rate and increased mean arterial pressure were more often observed in the terlipressin group. The overall response rates were not significantly different between the groups (52.8% vs. 44.8%, P=0.524). The terlipressin group had significantly higher response rates at 30 min compared to the high-dose octreotide group in those with alcoholic liver cirrhosis [6/6 (100%) vs. 0/4 (0%), P=0.005]. The incidence of adverse drug events was rare and similar in the two groups.

Conclusions

Both terlipressin and high-dose octreotide were effective and safe for reducing HVPG. The pharmacodynamic effect of terlipressin persisted longer. The terlipressin group had higher response rates in those with alcoholic cirrhosis (trial number: NCT02119884).

Preparation of long-acting microspheres loaded with octreotide for the treatment of portal hypertensive

The purpose of this study was to optimize the preparation method of injectable Octreotide microspheres. To explore the correlation between the solvent system and the general properties of microspheres to reduce burst release and enable them to be used for portal hypertension. Octreotide microspheres were prepared by modified double emulsion solution evaporation method after optimizing preparation conditions. The results showed that Octreotide microspheres had a particle size of 57.48 ± 15.24 μm, and the initial release was significantly reduced. In vitro release and in vivo pharmacokinetic data indicated that Octreotide was released stably within 1200 h. The effects on portal vein pressure, liver tissue morphology and other related indexes were observed after administration. As obvious results, injection of Octreotide microspheres could significantly reduce portal vein pressure and reduce the portal vein lumen area in experimental cirrhotic portal hypertensive rats. The optimized Octreotide PLGA microsphere preparation has been proved to have a good effect on PHT in vivo after detecting aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) activity, liver tissue hydroxyproline (Hyp) content, serum and liver tissue malondialdehyde (MDA) levels, plasma prostacyclin (PGI₂) levels, and liver tissue tumor necrosis factor (TNFα) content. In addition, serum and liver tissue superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and liver tissue glutathione (GSH) content, plasma thromboxane (TXA₂), serum nitric oxide (NO), liver tissue nitric oxide synthase (NOS), and plasma and liver tissue endothelin (ET) were significantly increased.

Pathophysiology and Management of Variceal Bleeding

Cirrhosis is the fifth leading cause of death in adults. Advanced cirrhosis can cause significant portal hypertension (PH), which is responsible for many of the complications observed in patients with cirrhosis, such as varices. If portal pressure exceeds a certain threshold, the patient is at risk of developing life-threatening bleeding from varices. Variceal bleeding has a high incidence among patients with liver cirrhosis and carries a high risk of mortality and morbidity. The management of variceal bleeding is complex, often requiring a multidisciplinary approach involving pharmacological, endoscopic, and radiologic interventions. In terms of management, three stages can be considered: primary prophylaxis, active bleeding, and secondary prophylaxis. The main goal of primary and secondary prophylaxis is to prevent variceal bleeding. However, active variceal bleeding is a medical emergency that requires swift intervention to stop the bleeding and achieve durable hemostasis. We describe the pathophysiology of cirrhosis and PH to contextualize the formation of gastric and esophageal varices. We also discuss the currently available treatments and compare how they fare in each stage of clinical management, with a special focus on drugs that can prevent bleeding or assist in achieving hemostasis.

Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common reason for hospital admission in older adult patients and carries a high morbidity and mortality if not properly managed. Risk factors include advanced age, Helicobacter pylori infection, medication use, smoking, and history of liver disease. Patients with known or suspected liver disease and suspected variceal bleeding should also receive antibiotics and somatostatin analogues. Risk stratification scores should be used to determine patients at highest risk for further decompensation. Upper endoscopy is both a diagnostic and therapeutic tool used in the management of upper GI bleeding. Endoscopy should be performed within 24 hours of presentation after appropriate resuscitation. Management of anticoagulation in upper GI bleeding largely depends on the indication for anticoagulation, the risk of continued bleeding with continuing the medication, and the risk of thrombosis with discontinuing the medication. A multidisciplinary approach to the decision of anticoagulation continuation is preferred when possible.

Keeping Patients with End-Stage Liver Disease Alive While Awaiting Transplant: Management of Complications of Portal Hypertension

Complications of portal hypertension such as gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage, ascites, and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, as well as pulmonary complications, are often responsible for diminished quality of life, excess morbidity and mortality, increased health care resource use and expenditure, and dropout from the liver transplant (LT) waiting list. Therefore, the care of LT candidates on the waiting list must be centered on anticipation and prompt intervention for these complications.

Overexpression of P-glycoprotein, MRP2, and CYP3A4 impairs intestinal absorption of octreotide in rats with portal hypertension

Background

Portal hypertension (PH) is the main cause of complications and death in liver cirrhosis. The effect of oral administration of octreotide (OCT), a drug that reduces PH by the constriction of mesenteric arteries, is limited by a remarkable intestinal first-pass elimination.

Methods

The bile duct ligation (BDL) was used in rats to induce liver cirrhosis with PH to examine the kinetics and molecular factors such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp), multidrug resistance-associated protein 2 (MRP2) and cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) influencing the intestinal OCT absorption via in situ and in vitro experiments on jejunal segments, transportation experiments on Caco-2 cells and experiments using intestinal microsomes and recombinant human CYP3A4. Moreover, RT-PCR, western blot, and immunohistochemistry were performed.

Results

Both in situ and in vitro experiments in jejunal segments showed that intestinal OCT absorption in both control and PH rats was largely controlled by P-gp and, to a lesser extent, by MRP2. OCT transport mediated by P-gp and MRP2 was demonstrated on Caco-2 cells. The results of RT-PCR, western blot, and immunohistochemistry suggested that impaired OCT absorption in PH was in part due to the jejunal upregulation of these two transporters. The use of intestinal microsomes and recombinant human CYP3A4 revealed that CYP3A4 metabolized OCT, and its upregulation in PH likely contributed to impaired drug absorption.

Conclusions

Inhibition of P-gp, MRP2, and CYP3A4 might represent a valid option for decreasing intestinal first-pass effects on orally administered OCT, thereby increasing its bioavailability to alleviate PH in patients with cirrhosis.