Noradrenaline for reverting hepatorenal syndrome: a prospective, observational, single-center study

Acute Kidney Injury in Liver Cirrhosis

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in cirrhotic patients affecting almost 20% of these patients. While multiple etiologies can lead to AKI, pre-renal azotemia seems to be the most common cause of AKI. Irrespective of the cause, AKI is associated with worse survival with the poorest outcomes observed in those with hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and acute tubular necrosis (ATN). In recent years, new definitions, and classifications of AKI in cirrhosis have emerged. More knowledge has also become available regarding the benefits and drawbacks of albumin and terlipressin use in these patients. Diagnostic tools such as urinary biomarkers and point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) became available and they will be used in the near future to differentiate between different causes of AKI and direct management of AKI in these patients. In this update, we will review these new classifications, treatment recommendations, and diagnostic tools for AKI in cirrhotic patients.

Responsiveness to Vasoconstrictor Therapy in Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1

Key Points

Raising the mean arterial pressure (MAP) during management of hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1) is associated with improvement in kidney function, independently of baseline MAP or model for end-stage liver disease. Raising the MAP by 15 mm Hg or greater leads to greater reduction in serum creatinine in HRS-1. Norepinephrine use confers greater probability of improvement in kidney function in HRS-1 compared with midodrine/octreotide.

Background

Raising mean arterial pressure (MAP) during treatment of hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1) with vasoconstrictors (VCs) is associated with renal recovery. However, the optimal MAP target and factors associated with response to VCs remain unclear.

Methods

Records from hospitalized patients with HRS-1 treated with VCs without shock were reviewed searching for those who achieved ≥5 mm Hg rise in MAP within 48 hours. We examined the relationship between the mean MAP achieved during the first 48–72 hours of VC therapy and the change in serum creatinine (sCr) up to day 14. Endpoints were >30% reduction in sCr without need for dialysis or death by day 14 (primary) or by day 30 (secondary).

Results

Seventy-seven patients with HRS-1 treated for 2–10 days with either norepinephrine (n =49) or midodrine/octreotide (n =28) were included. The median age was 52 years (interquartile range [IQR], 46–60), 40% were female, and 48% had alcoholic cirrhosis. At VC initiation, median MAP was 70 mm Hg (IQR, 66–73), and median sCr was 3.8 mg/dl (IQR, 2.6–4.9). When analyzed by tertiles of mean MAP increment (5–9, 10–14, ≥15 mm Hg), there was greater reduction in sCr with greater rise in MAP (ANOVA for trend, P < 0.0001). By multivariate logistic regression analysis, mean MAP rise during the first 48–72 hours (odds ratio [OR], 1.15 [1.02 to 1.299], P =0.025), norepinephrine as VC (OR, 5.46 [1.36 to 21.86], P =0.017), and baseline sCr [OR, 0.63 [0.41 to 0.97], P =0.034) were associated with the primary endpoint, whereas mean MAP rise during the first 48–72 hours (OR, 1.17 [1.04 to 1.33], P =0.012) and baseline sCr (OR, 0.63 [0.39 to 0.98], P =0.043) were associated with the secondary endpoint.

Conclusions

Greater magnitude of rise in MAP with VC therapy in HRS-1, lower baseline sCr, and use of norepinephrine over midodrine/octreotide are associated with kidney recovery. Targeting an increment of MAP ≥15 mm Hg may lead to favorable renal outcomes.

Update on hepatorenal Syndrome: Definition, Pathogenesis, and management

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is acute kidney injury (AKI) that occurs without evidence of structural abnormalities in the kidneys in patients with liver disease. It is thought to be due to splanchnic vasculature dilatation that is associated with intense increase of renal arteries' tone, leading to renal cortex ischemia and AKI. Nitric oxide, endotoxins, neurohormonal changes, bacterial infection, high serum bilirubin and bile acids are examples for factors contributing to HRS development. Nevertheless, other unknown factors may have role in HRS pathophysiology. Hence, further discussion and research are needed to clearly understand HRS. Plasma volume restoration and vasoconstrictors are the cornerstone of HRS treatment. Others such as octreotide, noradrenaline, infection control, systemic inflammatory response prevention, shunting, and renal replacement therapy are currently used to manage HRS. Liver or combined liver and kidney transplantation is currently the ultimate cure for HRS. This review was written to help in better understanding the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment options for HRS.

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

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

A Review for the Practicing Clinician: Hepatorenal Syndrome, a Form of Acute Kidney Injury, in Patients with Cirrhosis

The hepatorenal syndrome type of acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI), formerly known as type 1 hepatorenal syndrome, is a rapidly progressing renal failure that occurs in many patients with advanced cirrhosis and ascites. Accumulating evidence has led to a recent evolution of diagnostic criteria for this serious complication of end-stage liver disease. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of disease-related characteristics and therapeutic management of patients with HRS-AKI. Relevant literature was compiled to support discussion of the pathophysiology, diagnosis, prognosis, associated conditions, prevention, treatment, and management of HRS-AKI. Onset of HRS-AKI is characterized by sudden severe renal vasoconstriction, leading to an acute reduction in glomerular filtration rate and rapid, potentially life-threatening, renal deterioration. Although our understanding of disease pathophysiology continues to evolve, etiology of HRS-AKI likely involves systemic hemodynamic changes caused by liver disease, inflammation, and damage to renal parenchyma. There is currently no gold standard for diagnosis, which typically involves a clinical workup, abdominal imaging, and laboratory assessments. The current consensus definition of HRS-AKI includes proposed diagnostic criteria based on changes in serum creatinine levels tailored for high sensitivity, and rapid detection to accelerate diagnosis and treatment initiation. The only potential cure for HRS-AKI is liver transplantation; however, vasoconstrictive agents and other supportive measures are used as needed to help maintain survival for patients who are awaiting or are ineligible for transplantation. The severity of HRS-AKI, complex pathology, limited treatment options, and range of associated conditions pose significant challenges for both patients and care providers.

Hepatorenal syndrome: pathophysiology and evidence-based management update

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

Acute kidney injury and hepatorenal syndrome in cirrhosis

Acute kidney injury (AKI) in cirrhosis, including hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), is a common and serious complication in cirrhotic patients, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. AKI is separated into two categories, non-HRS AKI and HRS-AKI. The most recent definition and diagnostic criteria of AKI in cirrhosis and HRS have helped diagnose and prognosticate the disease. The pathophysiology behind non-HRS-AKI and HRS is more complicated than once theorized and involves more processes than just splanchnic vasodilation. The common biomarkers clinicians use to assess kidney injury have significant limitations in cirrhosis patients; novel biomarkers being studied have shown promise but require further studies in clinical settings and animal models. The overall management of non-HRS AKI and HRS-AKI requires a systematic approach. Although pharmacological treatments have shown mortality benefit, the ideal HRS treatment option is liver transplantation with or without simultaneous kidney transplantation. Further research is required to optimize pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic approaches to treatment. This article reviews the current guidelines and recommendations of AKI in cirrhosis.

Standardized approach of albumin, midodrine and octreotide on hepatorenal syndrome treatment response rate

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) remains a serious complication of cirrhosis with a high mortality rate. There is little information on the effect of standardizing albumin, midodrine and octreotide combination on treatment response in patients with HRS.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the impact of a standardized HRS treatment regimen on renal function recovery. The primary outcome was full response rate. Secondary outcomes included partial and no response rates, 30-day all-cause mortality, ICU length of stay (LOS), hospital LOS, liver transplantation and total dose of albumin.

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the impact of using a standardized approach with albumin, midodrine and octreotide on treatment response rates compared to a historical group.

RESULTS

Of the patients with HRS, 28 received a standardized approach with albumin, midodrine and octreotide while 60 received a nonstandardized approach. Ten percent of patients achieved full response in the prestandardization group compared with 25% in the poststandardization group (P = 0.07). Renal replacement therapy was significantly more prevalent in the prestandardization group vs. poststandardization group (45% vs. 21.4%, P = 0.03). Liver transplantation was performed significantly more often in the prestandardization group compared the poststandardization group (23% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.02). Amount of albumin used was statistically lower in the poststandardization group (425 vs. 332 g, P = 0.05). No significant differences in days of HRS treatment, mortality rate, hospital and ICU LOS were observed.

CONCLUSION

A trend towards improved treatment response rate was observed after standardizing the HRS treatment regimen. Standardized therapy led to significantly lower rates of renal replacement therapy and liver transplantation, suggesting patients in poststandardization were effectively managed medically without requiring further intervention.

HEP-Net opinion on the management of ascites and its complications in the setting of decompensated cirrhosis in the resource constrained environment of Pakistan

Approximately one half of patients develop ascites within 10 years of diagnosis of compensated cirrhosis. It is a poor prognostic indicator, with only 50% surviving beyond two years. Mortality worsens significantly to 20% to 50% at one year if the ascites becomes refractory to medical therapy. Pakistan has one of the highest prevalence of viral hepatitis in the world and patients with ascites secondary to liver cirrhosis make a major percentage of both inpatient and outpatient burden. Studies indicate that over 80% of patients admitted with ascites have liver cirrhosis as the cause. This expert opinion suggests proper assessment of patients with ascites in the presence of underlying cirrhosis. This expert opinion includes appropriate diagnosis and management of uncomplicated ascites, refractory ascites and complicated ascites (including spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) ascites, hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and hyponatremia. The purpose behind this expert opinion is to help consultants, postgraduate trainees, medical officers and primary care physicians optimally manage their patients with cirrhosis and ascites in a resource constrained setting as is often encountered in a developing country like Pakistan.

Management and outcomes of hepatorenal syndrome at an urban academic medical center: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

This study is aimed to evaluate the management of acute kidney injury (AKI) in our inner city, American hospital. We intended to ascertain whether or not there is prompt recognition of AKI in cirrhosis according to International Club of Ascites and acute kidney injury network criteria as well how effective we are at distinguishing among different causes of AKI. We aimed to calculated the mortality of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) in our hospital, and to evaluate the adequacy of the established treatment of AKI at each stage of its algorithm.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ICD diagnostic codes were used to identify patients with liver cirrhosis and acute renal failure. A total of 725 patients met the search criteria. We excluded the patients without clinical or imaging evidence of ascites, heart failure, on hemodialysis, baseline creatinine more than 1.5 mg/dl and patients who died within 48 h of developing acute renal failure. 291 patients met the inclusion criteria. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 23.0 software with a two-sided significance level set at P value less than 0.05.

RESULTS

Mean age was 55.7 ± 0.61 and baseline serum creatinine was 0.94 ± 0.14. 66.5% of patients were African American, 27.3%, Hispanic, and 4.3% White. The average rise in creatinine from baseline was 1.36 ± 0.08 mg/dl. 27.2% of patients met the diagnostic criteria of HRS. 92.3% of patients with HRS received intravenous fluids and 75.4% received intravenous albumin within 48 h of acute creatinine rise. The in-hospital mortality rate was 14.1, 23.3, and 41.5% for patients with pre-renal azotemia, ARF, and HRS, respectively (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that with present tools, there is significantly higher mortality in HRS despite guideline-based treatment. Biomarkers for early diagnosis of HRS are necessary to avoid delays in initiation of HRS treatment while establishing the diagnosis. As well, worldwide standardization of the treatment of HRS will be important if the outcome is to be improved.

Reappraising the spectrum of AKI and hepatorenal syndrome in patients with cirrhosis

The occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with end-stage liver disease constitutes one of the most challenging clinical scenarios in in-hospital and critical care medicine. Hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1), which is a specific type of AKI that occurs in the context of advanced cirrhosis and portal hypertension, is associated with particularly high mortality. The pathogenesis of HRS-1 is largely viewed as a functional derangement that ultimately affects renal vasculature tone. However, new insights suggest that non-haemodynamic tubulo-toxic factors, such as endotoxins and bile acids, might mediate parenchymal renal injury in patients with cirrhosis, suggesting that concurrent mechanisms, including those traditionally associated with HRS-1 and non-traditional factors, might contribute to the development of AKI in patients with cirrhosis. Moreover, histological evidence of morphological abnormalities in the kidneys of patients with cirrhosis and renal dysfunction has prompted the functional nature of HRS-1 to be re-examined. From a clinical perspective, a diagnosis of HRS-1 guides utilization of vasoconstrictive therapy and decisions regarding renal replacement therapy. Patients with cirrhosis are at risk of AKI owing to a wide range of factors. However, the tools currently available to ascertain the diagnosis of HRS-1 and guide therapy are suboptimal. Short of liver transplantation, goal-directed haemodynamically targeted pharmacotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment for this condition; improved understanding of the underlying pathogenic mechanisms might lead to better clinical outcomes. Here, we examine our current understanding of the pathophysiology of HRS-1 and existing challenges in its diagnosis and treatment.

News in pathophysiology, definition and classification of hepatorenal syndrome: A step beyond the International Club of Ascites (ICA) consensus document

Renal dysfunction is a common, life-threatening complication occurring in patients with liver disease. Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) has been defined as a purely "functional" type of renal failure that often occurs in patients with cirrhosis in the setting of marked abnormalities in arterial circulation, as well as overactivity of the endogenous vasoactive systems.^4,5 In 2007, the International Club of Ascites (ICA) classified HRS into types 1 and 2 (HRS-1 and HRS-2).⁵ HRS-1 is characterised by a rapid deterioration of renal function that often occurs because of a precipitating event, while HRS-2 is a moderate and stable or slowly progressive renal dysfunction that often occurs without an obvious precipitant. Clinically, HRS-1 is characterised by acute renal failure while HRS-2 is mainly characterised by refractory ascites. Nevertheless, after these two entities were first described, new concepts, definitions, and diagnostic criteria have been developed by nephrologists for renal dysfunction in the general population and hospitalised patients. In particular, the definitions and characterisation of acute kidney injury (AKI), acute kidney disease and chronic kidney disease have been introduced/refined.⁶ Accordingly, a debate among hepatologists of the ICA led to a complete revision of the nomenclature and diagnosistic criteria for HRS-1, which was renamed HRS-AKI.⁷ Additionally, over recent years, greater granularity has been gained regarding the pathogenesis of HRS; it is now increasingly recognised that it is not a purely "functional" entity with haemodynamic derangements, but that systemic inflammation, oxidative stress and bile salt-related tubular damage may contribute significantly to its development. That is, HRS has an additional structural component that would not only make traditional diagnostic criteria less reliable, but would explain the lack of response to pharmacological treatment with vasoconstrictors plus albumin that correlates with a progressive increase in inflammation. Because classification, nomenclature, diagnostic criteria and pathogenic theories have evolved over the years since the traditional classification of HRS-1 and HRS-2 was first described, it was considered that all these novel aspects be reviewed and summarised in a position paper. The aim of this position paper authored by two hepatologists (members of ICA) and two nephrologists involved in the study of renal dysfunction in cirrhosis, is to complete the re-classification of HRS initiated by the ICA in 2012 and to provide an update on the definition, classification, diagnosis, pathophysiology and treatment of HRS.