Emergency Portacaval Shunt Versus Rescue Portacaval Shunt in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Emergency Treatment of Acutely Bleeding Esophageal Varices in Cirrhosis—Part 3

Emergency treatment of bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis is of singular importance because of the high mortality rate. Emergency portacaval shunt is rarely used today because of the belief, unsubstantiated by long-term randomized trials, that it causes frequent portal-systemic encephalopathy and liver failure. Consequently, portacaval shunt has been relegated solely to salvage therapy when endoscopic and pharmacologic therapies have failed. Question: Is the regimen of endoscopic sclerotherapy with rescue portacaval shunt for failure to control bleeding varices superior to emergency portacaval shunt? A unique opportunity to answer this question was provided by a randomized controlled trial of endoscopic sclerotherapy versus emergency portacaval shunt conducted from 1988 to 2005. Unselected consecutive cirrhotic patients with acute bleeding esophageal varices were randomized to endoscopic sclerotherapy (n = 106) or emergency portacaval shunt (n = 105). Diagnostic workup was completed and treatment was initiated within 8 h. Failure of endoscopic sclerotherapy was defined by strict criteria and treated by rescue portacaval shunt (n = 50) whenever possible. Ninety-six percent of patients had more than 10 years of follow-up or until death. Comparison of emergency portacaval shunt and endoscopic sclerotherapy followed by rescue portacaval shunt showed the following differences in measurements of outcomes: (1) survival after 5 years (72% versus 22%), 10 years (46% versus 16%), and 15 years (46% versus 0%); (2) median post-shunt survival (6.18 versus 1.99 years); (3) mean requirements of packed red blood cell units (17.85 versus 27.80); (4) incidence of recurrent portal-systemic encephalopathy (15% versus 43%); (5) 5-year change in Child’s class showing improvement (59% versus 19%) or worsening (8% versus 44%); (6) mean quality of life points in which lower is better (13.89 versus 27.89); and (7) mean cost of care per year ($39,200 versus$216,700). These differences were highly significant in favor of emergency portacaval shunt (all p < 0.001). Emergency portacaval shunt was strikingly superior to endoscopic sclerotherapy as well as to the combination of endoscopic sclerotherapy and rescue portacaval shunt in regard to all outcome measures, specifically bleeding control, survival, incidence of portal-systemic encephalopathy, improvement in liver function, quality of life, and cost of care. These results strongly support the use of emergency portacaval shunt as the first line of emergency treatment of bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis

A Nitric Oxide-Donating Statin Decreases Portal Pressure with a Better Toxicity Profile than Conventional Statins in Cirrhotic Rats

Statins present many beneficial effects in chronic liver disease, but concerns about safety exist. We evaluated the hepatic effects of a nitric oxide-releasing atorvastatin (NCX 6560) compared to conventional statins. Simvastatin, atorvastatin and NCX 6560 were evaluated in four-week bile duct-ligated rats (BDL) simulating decompensated cirrhosis and in thirteen-week carbon tetrachloride (CCl(4)) intoxicated rats, a model of early cirrhosis. In the BDL model, simvastatin treated rats showed high mortality and the remaining animals presented muscular and hepatic toxicity. At equivalent doses, NCX 6560 eliminated hepatic toxicity and reduced muscular toxicity (60–74%) caused by atorvastatin in the more advanced BDL model; toxicity was minimal in the CCl(4) model. Atorvastatin and NCX 6560 similarly reduced portal pressure without changing systemic hemodynamics in both models. Atorvastatin and NCX 6560 caused a mild decrease in liver fibrosis and inflammation and a significant increase in intrahepatic cyclic guanosine monophosphate. NCX 6560 induced a higher intrahepatic vasoprotective profile (activated endothelial nitric oxide synthase and decreased platelet/endothelial cell adhesion molecule-1), especially in the CCl(4) model, suggesting a higher benefit in early cirrhosis. In conclusion, NCX 6560 improves the liver profile and portal hypertension of cirrhotic rats similarly to conventional statins, but with a much better safety profile

The portal hypertension syndrome: etiology, classification, relevance, and animal models

BACKGROUND Portal hypertension is a key complication of portal hypertension, which is responsible for the development of varices, ascites, bleeding, and hepatic encephalopathy, which, in turn, cause a high mortality and requirement for liver transplantation. AIM This review deals with the present day state-of-the-art preventative treatments of portal hypertension in cirrhosis according to disease stage. Two main disease stages are considered, compensated and decompensated cirrhosis, the first having good prognosis and being mostly asymptomatic, and the second being heralded by the appearance of bleeding or non-bleeding complications of portal hypertension. RESULTS The aim of treatment in compensated cirrhosis is preventing clinical decompensation, the more frequent event being ascites, followed by variceal bleeding and hepatic encephalopathy. Complications are mainly driven by an increase of hepatic vein pressure gradient (HVPG) to values ≥10 mmHg (defining the presence of Clinically Significant Portal Hypertension, CSPH). Before CSPH, the treatment is limited to etiologic treatment of cirrhosis and healthy life style (abstain from alcohol, avoid/correct obesity…). When CSPH is present, association of a non-selective beta-blocker (NSBB), including carvedilol should be considered. NSBBs are mandatory if moderate/large varices are present. Patients should also enter a screening program for hepatocellular carcinoma. In decompensated patients, the goal is to prevent further bleeding if the only manifestation of decompensation was a bleeding episode, but to prevent liver transplantation and death in the common scenario where patients have manifested first non-bleeding complications. Treatment is based on the same principles (healthy life style..) associated with administration of NSBBs in combination if possible with endoscopic band ligation if there has been variceal bleeding, and complemented with simvastatin administration (20-40 mg per day in Child-Pugh A/B, 10-20 mg in Child C). Recurrence shall be treated with TIPS. TIPS might be indicated earlier in patients with: 1) Difficult/refractory ascites, who are not the best candidates for NSBBs, 2) patients having bleed under NSBBs or showing no HVPG response (decrease in HVPG of at least 20% of baseline or to values equal or below 12 mmHg). Decompensated patients shall all be considered as potential candidates for liver transplantation. CONCLUSION Treatment of portal hypertension has markedly improved in recent years. The present day therapy is based on accurate risk stratification according to disease stage