Profile of hepatic encephalopathy in children with cirrhosis and response to lactulose

Beyond Varices: Complications of Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension in Pediatrics

Complications of cirrhotic portal hypertension (PHTN) in children are broad and include clinical manifestations ranging from variceal hemorrhage, hepatic encephalopathy (HE), ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) to less common conditions such as hepatopulmonary syndrome, portopulmonary hypertension, and cirrhotic cardiomyopathy. The approaches to the diagnosis and management of these complications have become standard of practice in adults with cirrhosis with many guidance statements available. However, there is limited literature on the diagnosis and management of these complications of PHTN in children with much of the current guidance available focused on variceal hemorrhage. The aim of this review is to summarize the current literature in adults who experience these complications of cirrhotic PHTN beyond variceal hemorrhage and present the available literature in children, with a focus on diagnosis, management, and liver transplant decision making in children with cirrhosis who develop ascites, SBP, HRS, HE, and cardiopulmonary complications.

Consensus on the management of complications of cirrhosis of the liver in pediatrics

The Asociación Mexicana de Hepatología A.C. carried out the Consensus on the Management of Complications of Cirrhosis of the Liver in Pediatrics to provide physicians with useful information for treating said complications. A group of pediatric gastroenterologists and experts in nutrition, nephrology, and infectious diseases participated and reviewed the medical literature. The Delphi method was applied to obtain the level of agreement on the statements that were formulated. The statements were sent to the participants to be analyzed and voted upon, after which they were discussed in virtual sessions, and the final versions were produced. The aim of the consensus results was to issue indications for the management of pediatric patients with liver cirrhosis, to prevent or control complications.

Non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and lactulose versus lactitol for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Non-absorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol) are recommended as first-line treatment for hepatic encephalopathy. The previous (second) version of this review included 10 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and eight RCTs evaluating lactulose versus lactitol for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. The review found no evidence to either support or refute the use of the non-absorbable disaccharides and no differences between lactulose versus lactitol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of i) non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and ii) lactulose versus lactitol in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to 19 October 2015; manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We presented the results of meta-analyses as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) and bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. Our analyses included regression analyses of publication bias and other small study effects, Trial Sequential Analyses to detect type 1 and type 2 errors, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with a total of 1828 participants. Eight RCTs had a low risk of bias in the assessment of mortality. All trials had a high risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention on mortality when including all RCTs with extractable data (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence) and in the eight RCTs with a low risk of bias (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; 705 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis with the relative risk reduction (RRR) reduced to 30% confirmed the findings when including all RCTs, but not when including only RCTs with a low risk of bias or when we reduced the RRR to 22%. Compared with placebo/no intervention, the non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with beneficial effects on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.69; 1415 participants; 22 RCTs; I(2) = 32%; moderate quality evidence). Additional analyses showed that non-absorbable disaccharides can help to reduce serious adverse events associated with the underlying liver disease including liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.60; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We confirmed the results in Trial Sequential Analysis. Tests for subgroup differences showed no statistical differences between RCTs evaluating prevention, overt, or minimal hepatic encephalopathy. The evaluation of secondary outcomes showed a potential beneficial effect of the non-absorbable disaccharides on quality of life, but we were not able to include the data in an overall meta-analysis (very low quality evidence). Non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with non-serious (mainly gastrointestinal) adverse events (very low quality evidence). None of the RCTs comparing lactulose versus lactitol evaluated quality of life. The review found no differences between lactulose and lactitol for the remaining outcomes (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review includes a large number of RCTs evaluating the prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The analyses found evidence that non-absorbable disaccharides may be associated with a beneficial effect on clinically relevant outcomes compared with placebo/no intervention.

Non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and lactulose versus lactitol for the prevention and treatment of hepatic encephalopathy in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Non-absorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol) are recommended as first-line treatment for hepatic encephalopathy. The previous (second) version of this review included 10 randomised clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and eight RCTs evaluating lactulose versus lactitol for people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. The review found no evidence to either support or refute the use of the non-absorbable disaccharides and no differences between lactulose versus lactitol.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of i) non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention and ii) lactulose versus lactitol in people with cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy.

SEARCH METHODS

We carried out electronic searches of the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2015, Issue 10), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded to 19 October 2015; manual searches of meetings and conference proceedings; checks of bibliographies; and correspondence with investigators and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs, irrespective of publication status, language, or blinding.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, working independently, retrieved data from published reports and correspondence with investigators. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatic encephalopathy, and serious adverse events. We presented the results of meta-analyses as risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We assessed the quality of the evidence using 'Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation' (GRADE) and bias control using the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. Our analyses included regression analyses of publication bias and other small study effects, Trial Sequential Analyses to detect type 1 and type 2 errors, and subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 38 RCTs with a total of 1828 participants. Eight RCTs had a low risk of bias in the assessment of mortality. All trials had a high risk of bias in the assessment of the remaining outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis showed a beneficial effect of non-absorbable disaccharides versus placebo/no intervention on mortality when including all RCTs with extractable data (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence) and in the eight RCTs with a low risk of bias (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.97; 705 participants). The Trial Sequential Analysis with the relative risk reduction (RRR) reduced to 30% confirmed the findings when including all RCTs, but not when including only RCTs with a low risk of bias or when we reduced the RRR to 22%. Compared with placebo/no intervention, the non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with beneficial effects on hepatic encephalopathy (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.69; 1415 participants; 22 RCTs; I(2) = 32%; moderate quality evidence). Additional analyses showed that non-absorbable disaccharides can help to reduce serious adverse events associated with the underlying liver disease including liver failure, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.60; 1487 participants; 24 RCTs; I(2) = 0%; moderate quality evidence). We confirmed the results in Trial Sequential Analysis. Tests for subgroup differences showed no statistical differences between RCTs evaluating prevention, overt, or minimal hepatic encephalopathy. The evaluation of secondary outcomes showed a potential beneficial effect of the non-absorbable disaccharides on quality of life, but we were not able to include the data in an overall meta-analysis (very low quality evidence). Non-absorbable disaccharides were associated with non-serious (mainly gastrointestinal) adverse events (very low quality evidence). None of the RCTs comparing lactulose versus lactitol evaluated quality of life. The review found no differences between lactulose and lactitol for the remaining outcomes (very low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review includes a large number of RCTs evaluating the prevention or treatment of hepatic encephalopathy. The analyses found evidence that non-absorbable disaccharides may be associated with a beneficial effect on clinically relevant outcomes compared with placebo/no intervention.

Cirrhosis in children and adolescents: An overview

Several conditions, especially chronic liver diseases, can lead to cirrhosis in children and adolescents. Most cases in clinical practice are caused by similar etiologies. In infants, cirrhosis is most often caused by biliary atresia and genetic-metabolic diseases, while in older children, it tends to result from autoimmune hepatitis, Wilson's disease, alpha-1-antitrypsin deficiency and primary sclerosing cholangitis. The symptoms of cirrhosis in children and adolescents are similar to those of adults. However, in pediatric patients, the first sign of cirrhosis is often poor weight gain. The complications of pediatric cirrhosis are similar to those observed in adult patients, and include gastrointestinal bleeding caused by gastroesophageal varices, ascites and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. In pediatric patients, special attention should be paid to the nutritional alterations caused by cirrhosis, since children and adolescents have higher nutritional requirements for growth and development. Children and adolescents with chronic cholestasis are at risk for several nutritional deficiencies. Malnutrition can have severe consequences for both pre- and post-liver transplant patients. The treatment of cirrhosis-induced portal hypertension in children and adolescents is mostly based on methods developed for adults. The present article will review the diagnostic and differential diagnostic aspects of end-stage liver disease in children, as well as the major treatment options for this condition.

Management of overt hepatic encephalopathy

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is an important complication of cirrhosis with significant morbidity and mortality. Management of HE primarily involves avoidance of precipitating factors and administration of various ammonia-lowering therapies such as non-absorbable disaccharides, antimicrobial agents like rifaximin and l-ornithine l-aspartate. The non-absorbable disaccharides which include lactulose and lactitol are considered the first-line therapy for the treatment of HE and in primary and secondary prophylaxis of HE. Lactitol is comparable to lactulose in the treatment of HE with fewer side effects. Rifaximin is effective in treatment of HE and recent systemic reviews found it comparable to disaccharides and is effective in secondary prophylaxis of HE. Many agents like l-ornithine l-aspartate, probiotics, zinc, sodium benzoate have been tried either alone or in combination with lactulose for the treatment of HE. Combination therapy of disaccharides either with rifaximin, l-ornithine l-aspartate, probiotics for the treatment of HE needs further validation in large studies.

Disaccharides in the treatment of hepatic encephalopathy

Management of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) primarily involves avoidance of precipitating factors and administration of various ammonia-lowering therapies such as nonabsorbable disaccharides and antimicrobial agents like rifaximin. The nonabsorbable disaccharides which include lactulose and lactitol are considered the first-line therapy for the treatment of HE and minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE). Lactulose significantly improves cognitive function and health-related quality of life in patients with MHE. Lactitol is comparable to lactulose in the treatment of HE with fewer side effects. Lactulose has also shown to be effective in primary and secondary prophylaxis of HE. Disaccharides were found to be comparable to rifaximin in recent systemic reviews in the treatment of HE however conclusion was based on inclusion of some poor quality trials. Combination therapy of disaccharides either with rifaximin, L-ornithine L-aspartate,probiotics for the treatment of HE needs further validation in large studies.