Lisinopril-Induced Liver Injury: An Unusual Presentation and Literature Review

Lisinopril is an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I) that has been on market for more than 25 years. ACE-I are usually well tolerated and rarely have serious or life-threatening side effects. We describe an unusual presentation of fulminant hepatic cholestasis probably secondary to lisinopril. To our knowledge, this is the second case report which shows lisinopril-induced liver injury though a cholestatic mechanism. The patient was a 59-year-old woman with type 2 diabetes, a high body mass index and hypertension, who presented with a 5-week history of jaundice and itching. She had been started on lisinopril for diabetic nephropathy 8 weeks before admission. Other causes for cholestasis had been excluded through non-invasive immunology and virology screening, an ultrasound of the liver, magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography and a liver biopsy. The biopsy was consistent with drug-induced liver injury. Lisinopril was stopped 2 weeks before admission. The patient’s hospital stay was complicated by contrast nephropathy and influenza A which were both treated appropriately. Unfortunately, the liver cholestasis did not completely resolve following withdrawal of lisinopril and the patient died after 4 months. A literature search yielded only six other reported cases of lisinopril-induced liver injury. Five cases described hepatocellular damage and one showed cholestatic injury

Provision and standards of care for treatment and follow-up of patients with Autoimmune Hepatitis (AIH)

Background Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a substantial UK health burden, but there is variation in care, facilities and in opinion regarding management. We conducted an audit of service provision and care of patients with AIH in 28 UK hospitals. Methods Centres provided information about staffing, infrastructure and patient management (measured against predefined guideline-based standards) via a web-based data collection tool. Results Hospitals (14 university hospitals (UHs), 14 district general hospitals (DGHs)) had median (range) of 8 (3-23) gastroenterologists; including 3 (0-10) hepatologists. Eight hospitals (29%, all DGHs) had no hepatologist. In individual hospital departments, there were 50% (18-100) of all consultants managing AIH: in DGH's 92% (20-100) vs 46% (17-100) in UHs. Specialist nurses managed AIH in only 18%. Seventeen (61%) hospitals had a histopathologist with a liver interest, these were more likely to find rosettes than those without (172/795 vs 50/368; p<0.001). Of 999 steroid-treated patients with ≥12 months follow-up, 25% received steroids for <12 months. After 1 year of treatment, 82% of patients achieved normal serum alanine aminotransaminase (ALT); this was higher in UHs than DGHs. Three-monthly liver blood tests were inadequately recorded in 26%. Of potentially eligible patients with liver decompensation, transplantation was apparently not considered in 5% (n=7). The same standards were attained in different types of hospital. Conclusion Management of AIH in UK hospitals is often shared between most gastroenterologists. Blood test monitoring and treatment duration are not always in line with recommendations. Some eligible patients with decompensation are not discussed with transplant teams. Care might be improved by expanding specialist input and management by fewer designated consultants

Albumin level and patient age predict outcomes in patients referred for gastrostomy insertion:internal and external validation of a gastrostomy score and comparison with artificial neural networks

Background: Significant mortality after gastrostomy insertion remains and some risk factors have been identified, but no predictive scoring system exists. Objective: To identify risk factors for mortality, formulate a predictive scoring system, and validate the score. Comparison to an artificial neural network (ANN). Design: Endoscopic database analysis. Setting: Six hospitals (2 teaching hospitals) in the South Yorkshire region, United Kingdom. Patients: This study involved all patients referred for gastrostomy insertion. Intervention: Generation of clinical scores to predict 30-day mortality in patients undergoing gastrostomy insertion. Main Outcome Measurements: Risk factors for 30-day mortality. Internal and external validation of the score. Comparison with an ANN. Results: Univariate analysis showed that 30-day mortality was associated with age, albumin levels, and cardiac and neurological comorbidities. Multivariate analysis showed that only age and albumin levels were independent. Modeling provided scores of 0, 1, 2, and 3 corresponding to 30-day mortalities of 0% (0-2.1), 7% (2.9-13.9), 21.3% (13.5-30.9), and 37.3% (24.1-51.9), respectively. Application of the scoring system at the other teaching hospital and the 4 district general hospitals gave 30-day mortality rates that were not significantly different from those predicted. Receiver operating characteristic curves for the score and the ANN were comparable. Limitations: Nonrandomized study. Score not used as a decision-making tool. Conclusion: The gastrostomy score provides an estimate of 30-day mortality for patients (and their relatives) when gastrostomy insertion is being discussed. This score requires evaluation as a decision-making tool in clinical practice. ANN analysis results were similar to the outcomes from the clinical score

Pretreatment prediction of response to ursodeoxycholic acid in primary biliary cholangitis: development and validation of the UDCA Response Score.

BACKGROUND Treatment guidelines recommend a stepwise approach to primary biliary cholangitis: all patients begin treatment with ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) monotherapy and those with an inadequate biochemical response after 12 months are subsequently considered for second-line therapies. However, as a result, patients at the highest risk can wait the longest for effective treatment. We determined whether UDCA response can be accurately predicted using pretreatment clinical parameters. METHODS We did logistic regression analysis of pretreatment variables in a discovery cohort of patients in the UK with primary biliary cholangitis to derive the best-fitting model of UDCA response, defined as alkaline phosphatase less than 1·67 times the upper limit of normal (ULN), measured after 12 months of treatment with UDCA. We validated the model in an external cohort of patients with primary biliary cholangitis and treated with UDCA in Italy. Additionally, we assessed correlations between model predictions and key histological features, such as biliary injury and fibrosis, on liver biopsy samples. FINDINGS 2703 participants diagnosed with primary biliary cholangitis between Jan 1, 1998, and May 31, 2015, were included in the UK-PBC cohort for derivation of the model. The following pretreatment parameters were associated with lower probability of UDCA response: higher alkaline phosphatase concentration (p<0·0001), higher total bilirubin concentration (p=0·0003), lower aminotransferase concentration (p=0·0012), younger age (p<0·0001), longer interval from diagnosis to the start of UDCA treatment (treatment time lag, p<0·0001), and worsening of alkaline phosphatase concentration from diagnosis (p<0·0001). Based on these variables, we derived a predictive score of UDCA response. In the external validation cohort, 460 patients diagnosed with primary biliary cholangitis were treated with UDCA, with follow-up data until May 31, 2016. In this validation cohort, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the score was 0·83 (95% CI 0·79-0·87). In 20 liver biopsy samples from patients with primary biliary cholangitis, the UDCA response score was associated with ductular reaction (r=-0·556, p=0·0130) and intermediate hepatocytes (probability of response was 0·90 if intermediate hepatocytes were absent vs 0·51 if present). INTERPRETATION We have derived and externally validated a model based on pretreatment variables that accurately predicts UDCA response. Association with histological features provides face validity. This model provides a basis to explore alternative approaches to treatment stratification in patients with primary biliary cholangitis. FUNDING UK Medical Research Council and University of Milan-Bicocca