20 research outputs found

    A multicenter retrospective cohort analysis of therapeutic hypothermia in acute liver failure

    Get PDF
    Cerebral edema is a severe and life-threatening complication in acute liver failure (ALF). Concerns exist that therapeutic hypothermia (TH) may increase the risk of infection, worsen coagulopathy and inhibit hepatic regeneration. We therefore reviewed the experience in use of TH in participating US Acute Liver Failure Study Group (ALFSG) centers. The aims were to determine utilization of TH in ALF patients at high risk for cerebral edema (grade III or IV hepatic encephalopathy (HE)) and to determine its effect on survival and complication rates

    The Natural History of Severe Acute Liver Injury.

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: Acute liver failure (ALF) is classically defined by coagulopathy and hepatic encephalopathy (HE); however, acute liver injury (ALI), i.e., severe acute hepatocyte necrosis without HE, has not been carefully defined nor studied. Our aim is to describe the clinical course of specifically defined ALI, including the risk and clinical predictors of poor outcomes, namely progression to ALF, the need for liver transplantation (LT) and death. METHODS: 386 subjects prospectively enrolled in the Acute Liver Failure Study Group registry between 1 September 2008 through 25 October 2013, met criteria for ALI: International Normalized Ratio (INR)≥2.0 and alanine aminotransferase (ALT)≥10 × elevated (irrespective of bilirubin level) for acetaminophen (N-acetyl-p-aminophenol, APAP) ALI, or INR≥2.0, ALT≥10x elevated, and bilirubin≥3.0 mg/dl for non-APAP ALI, both groups without any discernible HE. Subjects who progressed to poor outcomes (ALF, death, LT) were compared, by univariate analysis, with those who recovered. A model to predict poor outcome was developed using the random forest (RF) procedure. RESULTS: Progression to a poor outcome occurred in 90/386 (23%), primarily in non-APAP (71/179, 40%) vs. only 14/194 (7.2%) in APAP patients comprising 52% of all cases (13 cases did not have an etiology assigned; 5 of whom had a poor outcome). Of 82 variables entered into the RF procedure: etiology, bilirubin, INR, APAP level and duration of jaundice were the most predictive of progression to ALF, LT, or death. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of ALI cases are due to APAP, 93% of whom will improve rapidly and fully recover, while non-APAP patients have a far greater risk of poor outcome and should be targeted for early referral to a liver transplant center

    Percutaneous transhepatic vs. endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage for suspected malignant hilar obstruction: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

    Full text link
    Abstract Background The optimal approach to the drainage of malignant obstruction at the liver hilum remains uncertain. We aim to compare percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) to endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) as the first intervention in patients with cholestasis due to suspected malignant hilar obstruction (MHO). Methods The INTERCPT trial is a multi-center, comparative effectiveness, randomized, superiority trial of PTBD vs. ERC for decompression of suspected MHO. One hundred and eighty-four eligible patients across medical centers in the United States, who provide informed consent, will be randomly assigned in 1:1 fashion via a web-based electronic randomization system to either ERC or PTBD as the initial drainage and, if indicated, diagnostic procedure. All subsequent clinical interventions, including crossover to the alternative procedure, will be dictated by treating physicians per usual clinical care. Enrolled subjects will be assessed for successful biliary drainage (primary outcome measure), adequate tissue diagnosis, adverse events, the need for additional procedures, hospitalizations, and oncological outcomes over a 6-month follow-up period. Subjects, treating clinicians and outcome assessors will not be blinded. Discussion The INTERCPT trial is designed to determine whether PTBD or ERC is the better initial approach when managing a patient with suspected MHO, a common clinical dilemma that has never been investigated in a randomized trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT03172832 . Registered on 1 June 2017.https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142379/1/13063_2018_Article_2473.pd
    corecore