Terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs for hepatorenal syndrome

OCE-205 in rats and non-human primates: Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis

Treatment for complications associated with the hemodynamic consequences of decompensated cirrhosis remains suboptimal. Terlipressin, the latest pharmacological management of hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI), targets the vasopressin system but has serious side effects. OCE-205 is a novel peptide designed to target the vasopressin receptor system as a mixed V1a agonist/antagonist, resulting in effective partial agonism without V2 agonism. We examined the in vivo pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of OCE-205 in healthy rats and cynomolgus monkeys. OCE-205 was administered by IV or SC bolus injection; arginine vasopressin (AVP) or terlipressin were comparators. After IV OCE-205 administration in rats, mean plasma concentration decreased in a mostly linear manner to 2 mg/mL after 120 min, and for SC administration, slowly decreased to ∼50 ng/mL after 300 min. Compared with pre-test values, arterial blood pressure values significantly increased after all OCE-205 doses tested. For monkeys, the concentration after IV OCE-205 administration was mostly linear to 5 ng/mL after 180 min, and for SC administration, ∼3 ng/mL after 480 min. Subcutaneous OCE-205 administration increased mean arterial pressure (MAP) versus baseline, with ΔMAP in OCE-205-treated animals marked and long-lasting while terlipressin induced an increase from baseline in MAP, with negligible ΔMAP, on average, by 150 min after administration in all groups. AVP, but not OCE-205, significantly increased blood lactate concentrations. OCE-205 was well tolerated in adult male rats and cynomolgus monkeys following single-dose bolus administration. The preclinical results of OCE-205, with its demonstrated V1a selective partial agonist activity and potentially tolerable safety profile, suggest its potential utility for treatment of the cardiovascular complications of cirrhosis.

Institutional protocol number

Procedures were approved by the Ferring Research Institute (FRI) Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) on November 27, 2006 under protocol FRI 06-011, and by the Sinclair Research Center IACUC under protocol S11177.

OCE-205, a Selective V1a Partial Agonist, Reduces Portal Pressure in Rat Models of Portal Hypertension

Purpose

Management of decompensated cirrhosis may include the use of vasoconstrictors that can lead to serious adverse events. OCE-205 was designed as a highly selective V1a receptor partial agonist, intended to have a wider therapeutic window than full vasopressin agonists.

Methods

We aimed to characterize the activity of OCE-205 treatment in two rat models of portal hypertension (PHT). For both models, OCE-205 was administered as a subcutaneous bolus injection. Thirty male Wistar rats were fed a methionine/choline-deficient (MCD) diet to model PHT. Animals received OCE-205 (10, 25, 100, or 500 µg/kg) or intra-arterial terlipressin (100 µg/kg). In a more severe model of PHT, 11 male Sprague Dawley rats had the common bile duct surgically ligated (BDL) and received OCE-205. Portal pressure (PP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were measured.

Results

For PP in the MCD model, MAP increased while PP decreased in rats treated with OCE-205 or terlipressin; the peak changes to MAP were 14.7 and 33.5 mmHg, respectively. Changes in MAP began to plateau after 10 min in the OCE-205 groups, whereas in the terlipressin group, MAP rapidly increased and peaked after 20 min. Across all treatment groups in the BDL model, a dose-related decrease from baseline in PP was observed following OCE-205, plateauing as the dose increased. In all treatment groups, PP change remained negative throughout the 30-min testing period. In both PHT rat models, a reduction in PP was coupled to an increase in MAP, with both plateauing in dose-response curves.

Conclusion

Data support OCE-205 as a promising candidate for further development.

Institutional Protocol Number

Procedures were approved by the Ferring Research Institute (FRI) Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee on July 13, 2011, under protocol FRI-07-0002.

Recent advances in pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of hepatorenal syndrome: A review

Hepatorenal syndrome with acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) is a form of rapidly progressive kidney dysfunction in patients with decompensated cirrhosis and/or acute severe liver injury such as acute liver failure. Current data suggest that HRS-AKI occurs secondary to circulatory dysfunction characterized by marked splanchnic vasodilation, leading to reduction of effective arterial blood volume and glomerular filtration rate. Thus, volume expansion and splanchnic vasoconstriction constitute the mainstay of medical therapy. However, a significant proportion of patients do not respond to medical management. These patients often require renal replacement therapy and may be eligible for liver or combined liver-kidney transplantation. Although there have been advances in the management of patients with HRS-AKI including novel biomarkers and medications, better-calibrated studies, more widely available biomarkers, and improved prognostic models are sorely needed to further improve diagnosis and treatment of HRS-AKI.

Reversal of hepatorenal syndrome and kidney recovery: When renal has more to offer

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is one of the most severe complications in advanced cirrhosis. Type-1 HRS is relatively uncommon, yet carries considerably higher mortality rate. Effective treatment for HRS, especially therapy towards survival benefits, is still limited. However, the role for dialysis in HRS has been questioned over the years. The initiation of dialysis remains controversial for those who aren't transplant candidates. Meanwhile, there's a growing attention towards the successful use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) in cirrhotic patients. Herein, we report a case of HRS-1 in a 76-year-old male patient with decompensated cirrhosis. Through a series of adjustments of hemodialysis regimens and pharmacological prescriptions, patient stabilized and the opportunity for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) insertion was gained. PD was initiated after TIPS placement. With a gradual decrease of dialysis dose, patient successfully weaned off PD and achieved both reversal of HRS and kidney recovery. Markedly improved nutritional status and quality of life were reported. The potential role of dialysis and TIPS in HRS may be worth revisiting. Further studies regarding the optimal timing of dialysis initiation, choices of dialysis modality, and efficacy of dialysis therapy in combination with TIPS in HRS patients are warranted.

Current knowledge about biomarkers of acute kidney injury in liver cirrhosis

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in advanced cirrhosis. Prerenal azotemia, hepatorenal syndrome, and acute tubular necrosis are the main causes of AKI in patients with cirrhosis. Evaluation of renal function and differentiation between functional and structural kidney injury are important issues in the management of cirrhosis. However, AKI in cirrhosis exists as a complex clinical spectrum rather than concrete clinical entity. Based on current evidence, changes in serum creatinine (Cr) levels remain the most appropriate standard for defining AKI in cirrhosis. However, serum Cr has a limited role in assessing renal function in this population. This review examines previous studies that investigated the ability of recent biomarkers for AKI in cirrhosis from the perspective of earlier and accurate diagnosis, classification of AKI phenotype, and prediction of clinical outcomes. Serum cystatin C and urine neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin have been extensively studied in cirrhosis, and have facilitated improved diagnosis and prognosis prediction in patients with AKI. In addition, urine N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase, interleukin 18, and kidney injury molecule 1 are other promising biomarkers for advanced cirrhosis. However, the clinical significance of these markers remains unclear because there are no cut-off values defining the normal range and differentiating phenotypes of AKI. In addition, AKI has been defined in terms of serum Cr, and renal biopsy-the gold standard-has not been carried out in most studies. Further discovery of innovate biomarkers and incorporation of various markers could improve the diagnosis and prognosis prediction of AKI, and will translate into meaningful improvements in patient outcomes.

Norepinephrine is More Effective Than Midodrine/Octreotide in Patients With Hepatorenal Syndrome-Acute Kidney Injury: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Terlipressin is the first-line pharmacological treatment for hepatorenal syndrome. When terlipressin is unavailable, midodrine/octreotide or norepinephrine, with albumin, represent the alternative treatments. The comparative efficacy of these alternative regimens remains unclear.

Objective: To compare the efficacy of midodrine/octreotide to that of norepinephrine for the treatment of patients with hepatorenal syndrome.

Methods: In the intensive care setting, sixty patients with hepatorenal syndrome were randomized to initially receive either 0.5 mg/h of norepinephrine (maximum 3 mg/h) or 5 mg of oral midodrine three times/day (maximum 12.5 mg three times/day) plus octreotide (100 μg/6 h) as subcutaneous injection (maximum 200 μg/6 h), together with albumin (20–40 g/day). Treatment was allowed for a maximum of 10 days. Survival was analyzed for up to 30 days. The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved full response, defined as the return of serum creatinine to a value within 0.3 mg/dl of the baseline at the end of treatment.

Results: There was a significantly higher rate of full response in the norepinephrine group (15/26, 57.60%) than the midodrine/octreotide group (5/25, 20%) (p = 0.006). Eleven (42.30%) patients in the norepinephrine group and 6 (24%) in the midodrine/octreotide group survived (p = 0.166).

Conclusion: Norepinephrine plus albumin is significantly more effective than midodrine and octreotide plus albumin in improving renal function in patients with hepatorenal syndrome.

(ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT03455322).

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03455322?cond = Hepatorenal+Syndrome&cntry = EG&draw = 2&rank = 1.

Monitoring Renal Function and Therapy of Hepatorenal Syndrome Patients with Cirrhosis

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a frequent complication in patients with cirrhosis. Patients with cirrhosis can develop AKI due to different causes. Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a unique cause of AKI occurring in patients with advanced cirrhosis and is associated with high short-term mortality. The differential diagnosis between different causes of AKI may be challenging. In this regard, new urine biomarkers may be helpful. Liver transplantation is the definitive treatment of patients with HRS-AKI. Vasoconstrictors and albumin represent the first-line pharmacologic treatment of HRS-AKI. This review summarizes current knowledge for the diagnosis and management of HRS in cirrhosis.

Long-term albumin infusion in decompensated cirrhosis: A review of current literature

Decompensated cirrhosis is characterized by chronic inflammation and severe portal hypertension leading to systemic circulatory dysfunction. Albumin infusion has been widely used in decompensated cirrhosis in patients with spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, large-volume paracentesis and hepatorenal syndrome. Emerging data suggest long-term albumin infusion has both oncotic and non-oncotic properties which may improve the clinical outcomes in decompensated cirrhosis patients. We review the current literature on both the established and potential role of albumin, and specifically address the controversies of long-term albumin infusion in decompensated cirrhosis patients.

Guidelines on the management of ascites in cirrhosis

The British Society of Gastroenterology in collaboration with British Association for the Study of the Liver has prepared this document. The aim of this guideline is to review and summarise the evidence that guides clinical diagnosis and management of ascites in patients with cirrhosis. Substantial advances have been made in this area since the publication of the last guideline in 2007. These guidelines are based on a comprehensive literature search and comprise systematic reviews in the key areas, including the diagnostic tests, diuretic use, therapeutic paracentesis, use of albumin, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and beta-blockers in patients with ascites. Where recent systematic reviews and meta-analysis are available, these have been updated with additional studies. In addition, the results of prospective and retrospective studies, evidence obtained from expert committee reports and, in some instances, reports from case series have been included. Where possible, judgement has been made on the quality of information used to generate the guidelines and the specific recommendations have been made according to the 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE)' system. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians, and it is expected that these guidelines will be revised in 3 years' time.

Chinese guidelines on the management of liver cirrhosis (abbreviated version)

Based on reviews of the literature and experts' consensus, the Chinese Society of Hepatology developed guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of liver cirrhosis, in order to improve clinical practice. In addition to what has been covered in previously published guidelines on the management of cirrhosis complications, these guidelines add new sections and provide updates. The guidelines emphasize the early diagnosis of the cause and assessment of complications. Comprehensive treatments including etiological treatment and complication management should be initiated immediately. In addition, regular monitoring, especially surveillance of hepatocellular carcinoma, is crucial for managing patients.

Prevalence and short-term outcome of hepatorenal syndrome: A 9-year experience in a high-complexity hospital in Colombia

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hepatorenal syndrome is a rare entity that is part of the complications of liver cirrhosis in its more severe stages. Without treatment, its mortality rate increases significantly. Terlipressin is considered to be the therapy of choice until the need of a liver transplant. The aim is to determine its prevalence, define patients' characteristics, triggers and 90-day survival, according to the type of managements established.

METHOD

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted in Colombia. It included patients with cirrhosis and acute kidney injury who met hepatorenal syndrome criteria, reaching 28 patients from 2007 to 2015. Groups were categorized according the type of hepatorenal syndrome and treatment. Demographic and trigger factors were evaluated to characterize the population. Treatment outcomes with terlipressin vs norepinephrine were analyzed up to a 90-day survival, using log Rank test. Continuous variables needed Student's T and Mann Whitney's U tests and categorical variables, Chi2 test. A value of p <0.05 and a power of 85% was considered. The data was analyzed in the SPSS version 23 software.

RESULTS

117 patients with cirrhosis developed renal injury; of these 23.9% were diagnosed with Hepatorenal Syndrome (67.8% type1; 32.1% type2). The presence of ascites was 100% in HRS2 and 84% in HRS1 (p = 0.296). The main trigger in both types was paracentesis greater than 5 liters in the last 4 weeks (39.3%). In total, 35% of the patients received renal replacement therapy and 14% underwent a hepatic transplant. Type 1 was more frequent (63% received terlipressin; 21% norepinephrine). The total complete response was 36% (Type2 66.6% vs. Type1 18.7%) (p = 0.026). In contrast, the overall mortality was of 67.8% at 90-day of follow-up (89.4% Type1 vs. 22% Type2) (p = <0.001). We found a lower mortality rate in patients treated with terlipressin than treated with norepinephrine (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

There is scarce clinical and epidemiological information about this condition in Colombia. A significant difference between the two drugs cannot be stipulated due to the limitation in the sample size of our study. The general mortality at a 90-day follow-up was high, being higher in patients with HRS1. While the results of this study are suggestive of clinical information for HRS patients in the Colombian population, they should also be interpreted with caution, therefore further multicenter studies should be performed.

Management of Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Review

Acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs frequently in patients with cirrhosis, and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is second most common etiology of AKI after volume responsible pre-renal etiology. AKI in these patients negatively impacts pre- and post-transplant patient survival and healthcare burden. Reduced effective blood volume with consequent reduced renal blood flow, along with systemic inflammation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, result in susceptibility to HRS. In this article, we will review updates over the last 5 years on the changing definition with diagnostic criteria and nomenclature of AKI and HRS, data on medical treatment with vasoconstrictors, and urinary biomarkers in diagnosis of etiology of AKI. We will also discuss the significance of liver transplantation evaluation once the diagnosis of HRS is established and the post-transplant immunosuppression management. We will also review one of the challenging issues that remains among transplant-eligible patients, that of allocation of simultaneous liver kidney transplant. Finally, we will review the new implemented policy from the Organ Procurement Transplant Network on simultaneous liver kidney allocation.

Limited Progress in Hepatorenal Syndrome (HRS) Reversal and Survival 2002-2018: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a fatal complication of cirrhosis. Treatments trend toward HRS reversal, but few show clear mortality benefit. We sought to quantify the progress-or lack thereof-in improving outcomes of type 1 HRS over time.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing type 1 HRS outcomes including (a) overall survival (liver transplant-free survival if reported) and (b) HRS reversal. Each study arm was analyzed separately to look at changes in outcomes over time. RCTs published comparing medical treatments for type 1 HRS were searched using several databases through July 31, 2019.

RESULTS

Fourteen RCTs (28 arms) involving 778 participants enrolled between 2002 and 2018 were included. Twelve RCTs measured HRS reversal. In conjunction with albumin (or plasma expander), the most common medications used were terlipressin (13 arms), antibiotics (7), norepinephrine (6), dopamine (4), and midodrine/octreotide (3). Pooled survival rate was 34.6% (95% CI 26.4-43.8), and pooled HRS reversal rate was 42.8% (95% CI 34.2-51.9). Regression analyzing the incremental effect of the year the RCT was initiated showed that more recent studies were not associated with improved survival (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.11, p = 0.66) or HRS reversal rates (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96-1.11, p = 0.41). There was no survival improvement when RCTs with endpoints assessed ≤ or > 1 month were analyzed separately with respective OR of 1.07 (95% CI 0.95-1.20, p = 0.26) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.85-1.12, p = 0.70).

CONCLUSION

Outcomes have not improved for patients with type 1 HRS since 2002. There is a need to improve prevention and treatment of type 1 HRS.

Pharmacological treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Observational studies suggest that hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) patients who receive pharmacological therapy before orthotopic liver transplantation display a post-transplant outcome similar to those without HRS. The aim of this study was to comprehensively compare and rank the pharmacological therapies for HRS.

METHODS

We reviewed PubMed, Elsevier, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for studies that were published between 1 January 1999 and 24 February 2018. The primary endpoint was reversal of HRS. The secondary endpoints were the changes in serum creatinine (Scr) and serum sodium. We evaluated the different therapeutic strategies using network meta-analysis on the basis of Bayesian methodology.

RESULTS

The study included 24 articles with 1,419 participants evaluating seven different therapeutic strategies for HRS. The most effective treatments to induce reversal of HRS were terlipressin plus albumin, noradrenaline plus albumin, and terlipressin, which had a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of 0.086, 0.151, and 0.451, respectively. The top two treatments for decreasing Scr were dopamine plus furosemide plus albumin (rank probability: 0.620) and terlipressin plus albumin (rank probability: 0.570). For increasing serum sodium, the optimal treatment was octreotide plus midodrine plus albumin (rank probability: 0.800), followed by terlipressin plus albumin (rank probability: 0.544).

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin plus albumin and dopamine plus furosemide plus albumin should be prioritized for decreasing Scr in HRS, and octreotide plus midodrine plus albumin was the most effective at increasing serum sodium. Terlipressin plus albumin showed a comprehensive effect in both decreasing Scr and increasing serum sodium.

Dobutamine reverses the cardio-suppressive effects of terlipressin without improving renal function in cirrhosis and ascites: a randomized controlled trial

Acute kidney injury and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) are frequent complications in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. First-line treatment is terlipressin, which reverses HRS in ~40% of patients but also lowers cardiac output (CO). We aimed to investigate whether reversing the cardio-suppressive effect of terlipressin with the β-adrenoceptor agonist dobutamine would increase CO and thereby increase the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). We randomized 25 patients with cirrhosis, ascites, and impaired renal function (2:2:1): group A received terlipressin followed by the addition of dobutamine; group B received dobutamine and terlipressin as monotherapies; and group C received placebo. Renal and cardiac functions were assessed during 8 clearance periods of 30 min, and concentrations of vasoactive hormones were measured. Dobutamine as a monotherapy increased CO (1.03 L/min, P < 0.01) but had no significant effects on GFR. Renin (P < 0.05), angiotensin II (P < 0.005), and aldosterone (P < 0.05) increased after dobutamine infusion. Terlipressin as a monotherapy improved GFR (18.9 mL·min^-1·m^-2, P = 0.005) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) (14 mmHg, P = 0.001) but reduced CO (-0.92 L/min, P < 0.005) and renin (P < .005). A combined treatment of dobutamine and terlipressin had a positive effect on CO (1.19 L/min, P < 0.05) and increased renin (P < 0.005), angiotensin II (P < 0.005), and aldosterone (P < 0.05), but it had no significant effects on MAP or GFR. Dobutamine reversed the cardio-suppressive effect of terlipressin in cirrhosis, ascites, and impaired renal function. However, dobutamine reduced peripheral vascular resistance, activated renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system, and did not improve GFR compared with terlipressin as a monotherapy. Therefore, dobutamine cannot be recommended in cirrhosis and ascites.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study shows that the cardio-suppressive effects of the vasopressin receptor agonist terlipressin can be reversed by dobutamine. This is a novel observation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. Furthermore, we show that dobutamine reduced the peripheral vascular resistance and activated the renin-angiotensin system, whereas renal function was not further improved by terlipressin alone.

Treatment for hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome is defined as renal failure in people with cirrhosis in the absence of other causes. In addition to supportive treatment such as albumin to restore fluid balance, the other potential treatments include systemic vasoconstrictor drugs (such as vasopressin analogues or noradrenaline), renal vasodilator drugs (such as dopamine), transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and liver support with molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS). There is uncertainty over the best treatment regimen for hepatorenal syndrome.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for hepatorenal syndrome in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trial registers until December 2018 to identify randomised clinical trials on hepatorenal syndrome in people with cirrhosis.

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently identified eligible trials and collected data. The outcomes for this review included mortality, serious adverse events, any adverse events, resolution of hepatorenal syndrome, liver transplantation, and other decompensation events. We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, hazard ratio (HR), and mean difference (MD) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 25 trials (1263 participants; 12 interventions) in the review. Twenty-three trials (1185 participants) were included in one or more outcomes. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and all the evidence was of low or very low certainty. The trials included participants with liver cirrhosis of varied aetiologies as well as a mixture of type I hepatorenal syndrome only, type II hepatorenal syndrome only, or people with both type I and type II hepatorenal syndrome. Participant age ranged from 42 to 60 years, and the proportion of females ranged from 5.8% to 61.5% in the trials that reported this information. The follow-up in the trials ranged from one week to six months. Overall, 59% of participants died during this period and about 35% of participants recovered from hepatorenal syndrome. The most common interventions compared were albumin plus terlipressin, albumin plus noradrenaline, and albumin alone.There was no evidence of a difference in mortality (22 trials; 1153 participants) at maximal follow-up between the different interventions. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. There was no evidence of differences in the proportion of people with serious adverse events (three trials; 428 participants), number of participants with serious adverse events per participant (two trials; 166 participants), proportion of participants with any adverse events (four trials; 402 participants), the proportion of people who underwent liver transplantation at maximal follow-up (four trials; 342 participants), or other features of decompensation at maximal follow-up (one trial; 466 participants). Five trials (293 participants) reported number of any adverse events, and five trials (219 participants) reported treatment costs. Albumin plus noradrenaline had fewer numbers of adverse events per participant (rate ratio 0.51, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.87). Eighteen trials (1047 participants) reported recovery from hepatorenal syndrome (as per definition of hepatorenal syndrome). In terms of recovery from hepatorenal syndrome, in the direct comparisons, albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide and albumin plus octreotide had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome than albumin plus terlipressin (HR 0.04; 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.25 and HR 0.26, 95% CrI 0.07 to 0.80 respectively). There was no evidence of differences between the groups in any of the other direct comparisons. In the network meta-analysis, albumin and albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome compared with albumin plus terlipressin.

FUNDING

two trials were funded by pharmaceutical companies; five trials were funded by parties who had no vested interest in the results of the trial; and 18 trials did not report the source of funding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is no evidence of benefit or harm of any of the interventions for hepatorenal syndrome with regards to the following outcomes: all-cause mortality, serious adverse events (proportion), number of serious adverse events per participant, any adverse events (proportion), liver transplantation, or other decompensation events. Low-certainty evidence suggests that albumin plus noradrenaline had fewer 'any adverse events per participant' than albumin plus terlipressin. Low- or very low-certainty evidence also found that albumin plus midodrine plus octreotide and albumin alone had lower recovery from hepatorenal syndrome compared with albumin plus terlipressin.Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered; employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts or planned cross-overs (or perform an intention-to-treat analysis); and report clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, adverse events, and recovery from hepatorenal syndrome. Albumin plus noradrenaline and albumin plus terlipressin appear to be the interventions that should be compared in future trials.

Current evidence regarding terlipressin for treatment of hepatorenal syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of liver cirrhosis, which is characterized by oliguria, severe urinary sodium retention, and elevated serum creatinine levels. Liver transplantation is the best choice of therapy, but is rarely available. Current mainstay pharmacological therapy is vasoconstrictors with albumin. Terlipressin is a synthetic analog of vasopressin, and it has been used for the treatment of HRS. This article reviews the current status regarding terlipressin in the management of HRS from the perspective of evidence-based medicine.

Intensive Care Management of Patients with Cirrhosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cirrhosis is a major worldwide health problem which results in a high level of morbidity and mortality. Patients with cirrhosis who require intensive care support have high mortality rates of near 50%. The goal of this review is to address the management of common complications of cirrhosis in the ICU.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent epidemiological studies have shown an increase in hospitalizations due to advanced liver disease with an associated increase in intensive care utilization. Given an increasing burden on the healthcare system, it is imperative that we strive to improve our management cirrhotic patients in the intensive care unit. Large studies evaluating the management of patients in the intensive care setting are lacking. To date, most recommendations are based on extrapolation of data from studies in cirrhosis outside of the ICU or by applying general critical care principles which may or may not be appropriate for the critically ill cirrhotic patient. Future research is required to answer important management questions.

Terlipressin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome is a fatal complication of advanced cirrhosis. Terlipressin is the most widely used treatment method, however, the therapy effects remain inconsonant. We aim to systematically assess the safety and efficacy of terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials involving terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome were included in a systematic literature search. Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion and extracted the data. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the safety and efficacy of terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome.

RESULTS

A total of 18 randomized controlled trials including 1011 patients were included. Hepatorenal syndrome reverse rate was 42.0% in the terlipressin group and 26.2% in the non-terlipressin group. Terlipressin had greater hepatorenal syndrome reverse rate and renal function improvement rate than placebo and octreotide in the management of HRS. Comparing to norepinephrine, terlipressin had similar efficacy, but with more adverse events. No significant difference of the efficacy was found between terlipressin and dopamine treatment. The subgroup analysis for type 1 HRS had the above same results, except that the adverse events were not significant different between norepinephrine group and terlipressin group.

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin was superior to placebo and octreotide for reversal of hepatorenal syndrome and improving renal function, but it had no superiority comparing to norepinephrine.

Prognosis of Patients with Cirrhosis and AKI Who Initiate RRT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Literature on the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis who require RRT for AKI is sparse and is confounded by liver transplant eligibility. An update on outcomes in the nonlisted subgroup is needed. Our objective was to compare outcomes in this group between those diagnosed with hepatorenal syndrome and acute tubular necrosis, stratifying by liver transplant listing status.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

Retrospective cohort study of patients with cirrhosis acutely initiated on hemodialysis or continuous RRT at five hospitals, including one liver transplant center. Multivariable regression and survival analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Four hundred seventy-two subjects were analyzed (341 not listed and 131 listed for liver transplant). Among nonlisted subjects, 15% (51 of 341) were alive at 6 months after initiating RRT. Median survival was 21 (interquartile range [IQR], 8, 70) days for those diagnosed with hepatorenal syndrome and 12 (IQR, 3, 43) days for those diagnosed with acute tubular necrosis (P=0.25). Among listed subjects, 48% (63 of 131) received a liver transplant. Median transplant-free survival was 15 (IQR, 5, 37) days for those diagnosed with hepatorenal syndrome and 14 (IQR, 4, 31) days for those diagnosed with acute tubular necrosis (P=0.60). When stratified by transplant listing, with adjusted Cox models we did not detect a difference in the risk of death between hepatorenal syndrome and acute tubular necrosis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.81; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.59 to 1.11, among those not listed; HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.19, among those listed).

CONCLUSIONS

Cause of AKI was not significantly associated with mortality in patients with cirrhosis who required RRT. Among those not listed for liver transplant, mortality rates were extremely high in patients both with hepatorenal syndrome and acute tubular necrosis.

PODCAST

This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2017_11_09_CJASNPodcast_18_1_A.mp3.

Terlipressin versus placebo or no intervention for people with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome

BACKGROUND

Hepatorenal syndrome is a potentially reversible renal failure associated with severe liver disease. The disease is relatively common among people with decompensated cirrhosis. Terlipressin is a drug that increases the blood flow to the kidneys by constricting blood vessels. The previous version of this systematic review found a potential beneficial effect of terlipressin on mortality and renal function in people with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of terlipressin versus placebo/no intervention for people with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified eligible trials through searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded, and manual searches until 21 November 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) involving participants with cirrhosis and type 1 or type 2 hepatorenal syndrome allocated to terlipressin versus placebo or no intervention. We allowed co-administration with albumin administered to both comparison groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from trial reports and undertook correspondence with the authors. Primary outcomes were mortality, hepatorenal syndrome, and serious adverse events. We conducted sensitivity analyses of RCTs in which participants received albumin, subgroup analyses of participants with type 1 or type 2 hepatorenal syndrome, and Trial Sequential Analyses to control random errors. We reported random-effects meta-analyses with risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the risk of bias based on the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. We graded the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs with a total of 534 participants with cirrhosis and ascites. One RCT had a low risk of bias for mortality and a high risk of bias for the remaining outcomes. All included trials had a high risk of bias for non-mortality outcomes. In total, 473 participants had type 1 hepatorenal syndrome. Seven RCTs specifically evaluated terlipressin and albumin. Terlipressin was associated with a beneficial effect on mortality when including all RCTs (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.98; 534 participants; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 10.3 people; low-quality evidence). Trial Sequential Analysis including all RCTs also found a beneficial effect of terlipressin. Additional analyses showed a beneficial effect of terlipressin and albumin on reversal of hepatorenal syndrome (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.82; 510 participants; 8 RCTs; NNTB 4 people; low-quality evidence). Terlipressin increased the risk of serious cardiovascular adverse events (RR 7.26, 95% CI 1.70 to 31.05; 234 participants; 4 RCTs), but it had no effect on the risk of serious adverse events when analysed as a composite outcome (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.21; 534 participants; 9 RCTs; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome 24.5 people; low-quality evidence). Non-serious adverse events were mainly gastrointestinal, including diarrhoea (RR 5.76, 95% CI 2.19 to 15.15; 240 participants; low-quality evidence) and abdominal pain (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.97 to 2.43; 294 participants; low-quality evidence).We identified one ongoing trial on terlipressin versus placebo in participants with cirrhosis, ascites, and hepatorenal syndrome type 1.Three RCTs reported funding from a pharmaceutical company. The remaining trials did not report funding or did not receive funding from pharmaceutical companies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review suggests that terlipressin may be associated with beneficial effects on mortality and renal function in people with cirrhosis and type 1 hepatorenal syndrome, but it is also associated with serious adverse effects. We downgraded the strength of the evidence due to methodological issues including bias control, clinical heterogeneity, and imprecision. Consequently, additional evidence is needed.