Todavía se recetan medicamentos potencialmente hepatotóxicos a pacientes con enfermedad hepática que reciben atención terciaria: es hora de decir basta

Introduction and aim: Drug-induced liver injury (DILI) manifests as a spectrum of clinical presentations that carries morbidity and mortality. Patients with chronic liver disease (CLD), particularly hospitalized, are at high risk for developing DILI. We aimed to investigate the use of potentially hepatotoxic drugs (PHD) in patients with CLD in a tertiary university hospital. Materials and methods: Adult (≥ 18 years-old) with CLD admitted to the hospital from January 2016 to December 2018 were evaluated regarding PHD, assessing the risk of DILI and liver enzymes behavior after exposure. Results: From 931 hospitalized patients with CLD, 291 (31.3%) were exposed to hepatotoxic drugs during their hospitalization. Of those, 244 (83.8%) were cirrhotic. The most frequent causes of liver disease were hepatitis C (41.2%), followed by alcohol (13.2%), hepatitis C/alcohol (11.7%) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (5.8%). Decompensated cirrhosis (46.7%) was the main reason for hospital admission. The most often prescribed PHD were antibiotics (67.7%), cardiovascular drugs (34.4%), neuromodulators (26.1%) and anesthetics (19.9%). After exposure, 113 patients (38.8%) presented significant elevated liver enzymes. Surprisingly, PHD were more often prescribed in GI/Liver unit (48.8%) followed by emergency/intensive care unit (28.5%). A total of 65 patients (22%) died, however in neither case was it possible to safely infer causal relationship among PHD, liver enzymes and death. Conclusion: PHD prescription is frequent in patients with CLD even in a tertiary university hospital and in the gastroenterology and hepatology department, exposing these patients to an additional risk.Introducción y objetivo: La lesión hepática inducida por fármacos (DILI) se manifiesta como un espectro de presentaciones clínicas que conlleva morbilidad y mortalidad. Los pacientes con enfermedad hepática crónica (EHC), en particular hospitalizados, tienen un alto riesgo de desarrollar DILI. Nuestro objetivo fue investigar el uso de fármacos potencialmente hepatotóxicos (FPH) en pacientes con EHC en un hospital universitario terciario. Materiales y métodos: Se evaluó la expossición a FPH en adultos (≥ 18 años) con EHC ingresados en el hospital entre enero de 2016 y diciembre de 2018, evaluando el riesgo de DILI y el comportamiento de las enzimas hepáticas tras la exposición. Resultados: De 931 pacientes hospitalizados con EHC, 291 (31,3%) estuvieron expuestos a fármacos hepatotóxicos durante su hospitalización. De ellos, 244 (83,8%) eran cirróticos. Las causas más frecuentes de enfermedad hepática fueron la hepatitis C (41,2%), seguida del alcohol (13,2%), la hepatitis C / alcohol (11,7%) y la enfermedad del hígado graso no alcohólico (5,8%). La cirrosis descompensada (46,7%) fue el principal motivo de ingreso hospitalario. Los FPH más prescritos fueron antibióticos (67,7%), fármacos cardiovasculares (34,4%), neuromoduladores (26,1%) y anestésicos (19,9%). Tras la exposición, 113 pacientes (38,8%) presentaron elevación significativa de las enzimas hepáticas. Sorprendentemente, los FPH se prescribieron con mayor frecuencia en la unidad GI / Hígado (48,8%) seguido de la unidad de emergencia / cuidados intensivos (28,5%). Un total de 65 pacientes (22%) fallecieron, sin embargo, en ninguno de los casos fue posible inferir con seguridad la relación causal entre el FHD, las enzimas hepáticas y la muerte. Conclusión: la prescripción de FPH es frecuente en pacientes con EHC incluso en un hospital universitario terciario y en el servicio de gastroenterología y hepatología, exponiendo a estos pacientes a un riesgo adicional

Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma: Brazilian survey

OBJECTIVE: The majority of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma have been reported in individuals with cirrhosis due to chronic viral hepatitis and alcoholism, but recently, the prevalence has become increasingly related to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis around the world. The study aimed to evaluate the clinical and histophatological characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma in Brazilians' patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis at the present time. METHODS: Members of the Brazilian Society of Hepatology were invited to complete a survey regarding patients with hepatocellular carcinoma related to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Patients with a history of alcohol intake (>;20 g/day) and other liver diseases were excluded. Hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis was performed by liver biopsy or imaging methods according to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases’ 2011 guidelines. RESULTS: The survey included 110 patients with a diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease from nine hepatology units in six Brazilian states (Bahia, Minas Gerais, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul). The mean age was 67±11 years old, and 65.5% were male. Obesity was observed in 52.7% of the cases; diabetes, in 73.6%; dyslipidemia, in 41.0%; arterial hypertension, in 60%; and metabolic syndrome, in 57.2%. Steatohepatitis without fibrosis was observed in 3.8% of cases; steatohepatitis with fibrosis (grades 1-3), in 27%; and cirrhosis, in 61.5%. Histological diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma was performed in 47.2% of the patients, with hepatocellular carcinoma without cirrhosis accounting for 7.7%. In total, 58 patients with cirrhosis had their diagnosis by ultrasound confirmed by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Of these, 55% had 1 nodule; 17%, 2 nodules; and 28%, ≥3 nodules. CONCLUSIONS: Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is a relevant risk factor associated with hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with and without cirrhosis in Brazil. In this survey, hepatocellular carcinoma was observed in elevated numbers of patients with steatohepatitis without cirrhosis

Transarterial Embolization and Percutaneous Ethanol Injection as an Effective Bridge Therapy before Liver Transplantation for Hepatitis C-Related Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background. Transarterial chemoembolization alone or in association with radiofrequency ablation is an effective bridging strategy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma awaiting for a liver transplant. However, cost of this therapy may limit its utilization. This study was designed to evaluate the outcomes of a protocol involving transarterial embolization, percutaneous ethanol injection, or both methods for bridging hepatocellular carcinomas prior to liver transplantation. Methods. Retrospective review of all consecutive adult patients who underwent a first liver transplant as a treatment to hepatitis C-related hepatocellular carcinoma at our institution between 2002 and 2012. Primary endpoint was patient survival. Secondary endpoint was complete tumor necrosis. Results. Forty patients were analyzed, age 58 ± 7 years. There were 23 males (57.5%). Thirty-six (90%) out of the total 40 patients were within Milan criteria. Complete necrosis was achieved in 19 patients (47.5%). One-, 3-, and 5-year patient survival were, respectively, 87.5%, 75%, and 69.4%. Univariate analysis did not reveal any variable to impact on overall patient survival. Conclusions. Transarterial embolization, ethanol injection, or the association of both methods followed by liver transplantation comprises effective treatment strategy for hepatitis C-related hepatocellular carcinoma. This strategy should be adopted whenever transarterial chemoembolization and/or radiofrequency ablation are not available options

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on liver cancer management (CERO-19)

Background & Aims: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems and it may have heavily impacted patients with liver cancer (LC). Herein, we evaluated whether the schedule of LC screening or procedures has been interrupted or delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An international survey evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practice and clinical trials from March 2020 to June 2020, as the first phase of a multicentre, international, and observational project. The focus was on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, cared for around the world during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave. Results: Ninety-one centres expressed interest to participate and 76 were included in the analysis, from Europe, South America, North America, Asia, and Africa (73.7%,17.1%, 5.3%, 2.6%, and 1.3% per continent, respectively). Eighty-seven percent of the centres modified their clinical practice: 40.8% the diagnostic procedures, 80.9% the screening programme, 50% cancelled curative and/or palliative treatments for LC, and 41.7% modified the liver transplantation programme. Forty-five out of 69 (65.2%) centres in which clinical trials were running modified their treatments in that setting, but 58.1% were able to recruit new patients. The phone call service was modified in 51.4% of centres which had this service before the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 19/37). Conclusions: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on the routine care of patients with liver cancer. Modifications in screening, diagnostic, and treatment algorithms may have significantly impaired the outcome of patients. Ongoing data collection and future analyses will report the benefits and disadvantages of the strategies implemented, aiding future decision-making. Lay summary: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems globally. Herein, we assessed the impact of the first wave pandemic on patients with liver cancer and found that routine care for these patients has been majorly disrupted, which could have a significant impact on outcomes. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL)

Effects of immunosuppressive drugs on COVID-19 severity in patients with autoimmune hepatitis

Background: We investigated associations between baseline use of immunosuppressive drugs and severity of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Patients and methods: Data of AIH patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 were retrospectively collected from 15 countries. The outcomes of AIH patients who were on immunosuppression at the time of COVID-19 were compared to patients who were not on AIH medication. The clinical courses of COVID-19 were classified as (i)-no hospitalization, (ii)-hospitalization without oxygen supplementation, (iii)-hospitalization with oxygen supplementation by nasal cannula or mask, (iv)-intensive care unit (ICU) admission with non-invasive mechanical ventilation, (v)-ICU admission with invasive mechanical ventilation or (vi)-death and analysed using ordinal logistic regression. Results: We included 254 AIH patients (79.5%, female) with a median age of 50 (range, 17-85) years. At the onset of COVID-19, 234 patients (92.1%) were on treatment with glucocorticoids (n = 156), thiopurines (n = 151), mycophenolate mofetil (n = 22) or tacrolimus (n = 16), alone or in combinations. Overall, 94 (37%) patients were hospitalized and 18 (7.1%) patients died. Use of systemic glucocorticoids (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.73, 95% CI 1.12-25.89) and thiopurines (aOR 4.78, 95% CI 1.33-23.50) for AIH was associated with worse COVID-19 severity, after adjusting for age-sex, comorbidities and presence of cirrhosis. Baseline treatment with mycophenolate mofetil (aOR 3.56, 95% CI 0.76-20.56) and tacrolimus (aOR 4.09, 95% CI 0.69-27.00) were also associated with more severe COVID-19 courses in a smaller subset of treated patients. Conclusion: Baseline treatment with systemic glucocorticoids or thiopurines prior to the onset of COVID-19 was significantly associated with COVID-19 severity in patients with AIH.Fil: Efe, Cumali. Harran University Hospita; TurquíaFil: Lammert, Craig. University School of Medicine Indianapolis; Estados UnidosFil: Taşçılar, Koray. Universitat Erlangen-Nuremberg; AlemaniaFil: Dhanasekaran, Renumathy. University of Stanford; Estados UnidosFil: Ebik, Berat. Gazi Yasargil Education And Research Hospital; TurquíaFil: Higuera de la Tijera, Fatima. Hospital General de México; MéxicoFil: Calışkan, Ali R.. No especifíca;Fil: Peralta, Mirta. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital de Infecciosas "Dr. Francisco Javier Muñiz"; ArgentinaFil: Gerussi, Alessio. Università degli Studi di Milano; ItaliaFil: Massoumi, Hatef. No especifíca;Fil: Catana, Andreea M.. Harvard Medical School; Estados UnidosFil: Purnak, Tugrul. University of Texas; Estados UnidosFil: Rigamonti, Cristina. Università del Piemonte Orientale ; ItaliaFil: Aldana, Andres J. G.. Fundacion Santa Fe de Bogota; ColombiaFil: Khakoo, Nidah. Miami University; Estados UnidosFil: Nazal, Leyla. Clinica Las Condes; ChileFil: Frager, Shalom. Montefiore Medical Center; Estados UnidosFil: Demir, Nurhan. Haseki Training And Research Hospital; TurquíaFil: Irak, Kader. Kanuni Sultan Suleyman Training And Research Hospital; TurquíaFil: Melekoğlu Ellik, Zeynep. Ankara University Medical Faculty; TurquíaFil: Kacmaz, Hüseyin. Adıyaman University; TurquíaFil: Balaban, Yasemin. Hacettepe University; TurquíaFil: Atay, Kadri. No especifíca;Fil: Eren, Fatih. No especifíca;Fil: Alvares da-Silva, Mario R.. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Cristoferi, Laura. Università degli Studi di Milano; ItaliaFil: Urzua, Álvaro. Universidad de Chile; ChileFil: Eşkazan, Tuğçe. Cerrahpaşa School of Medicine; TurquíaFil: Magro, Bianca. No especifíca;Fil: Snijders, Romee. No especifíca;Fil: Barutçu, Sezgin. No especifíca;Fil: Lytvyak, Ellina. University of Alberta; CanadáFil: Zazueta, Godolfino M.. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran; MéxicoFil: Demirezer Bolat, Aylin. Ankara City Hospital; TurquíaFil: Aydın, Mesut. Van Yuzuncu Yil University; TurquíaFil: Amorós Martín, Alexandra Noemí. No especifíca;Fil: De Martin, Eleonora. No especifíca;Fil: Ekin, Nazım. No especifíca;Fil: Yıldırım, Sümeyra. No especifíca;Fil: Yavuz, Ahmet. No especifíca;Fil: Bıyık, Murat. Necmettin Erbakan University; TurquíaFil: Narro, Graciela C.. Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran; MéxicoFil: Bıyık, Murat. Uludag University; TurquíaFil: Kıyıcı, Murat. No especifíca;Fil: Kahramanoğlu Aksoy, Evrim. No especifíca;Fil: Vincent, Maria. No especifíca;Fil: Carr, Rotonya M.. University of Pennsylvania; Estados UnidosFil: Günşar, Fulya. No especifíca;Fil: Reyes, Eira C.. Hepatology Unit. Hospital Militar Central de México; MéxicoFil: Harputluoğlu, Murat. Inönü University School of Medicine; TurquíaFil: Aloman, Costica. Rush University Medical Center; Estados UnidosFil: Gatselis, Nikolaos K.. University Hospital Of Larissa; GreciaFil: Üstündağ, Yücel. No especifíca;Fil: Brahm, Javier. Clinica Las Condes; ChileFil: Vargas, Nataly C. E.. Hospital Nacional Almanzor Aguinaga Asenjo; PerúFil: Güzelbulut, Fatih. No especifíca;Fil: Garcia, Sandro R.. Hospital Iv Víctor Lazarte Echegaray; PerúFil: Aguirre, Jonathan. Hospital Angeles del Pedregal; MéxicoFil: Anders, Margarita. Hospital Alemán; ArgentinaFil: Ratusnu, Natalia. Hospital Regional de Ushuaia; ArgentinaFil: Hatemi, Ibrahim. No especifíca;Fil: Mendizabal, Manuel. Universidad Austral; ArgentinaFil: Floreani, Annarosa. Università di Padova; ItaliaFil: Fagiuoli, Stefano. No especifíca;Fil: Silva, Marcelo. Universidad Austral; ArgentinaFil: Idilman, Ramazan. No especifíca;Fil: Satapathy, Sanjaya K.. No especifíca;Fil: Silveira, Marina. University of Yale. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Drenth, Joost P. H.. No especifíca;Fil: Dalekos, George N.. No especifíca;Fil: N.Assis, David. University of Yale. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Björnsson, Einar. No especifíca;Fil: Boyer, James L.. University of Yale. School of Medicine; Estados UnidosFil: Yoshida, Eric M.. University of British Columbia; CanadáFil: Invernizzi, Pietro. Università degli Studi di Milano; ItaliaFil: Levy, Cynthia. University of Miami; Estados UnidosFil: Montano Loza, Aldo J.. University of Alberta; CanadáFil: Schiano, Thomas D.. No especifíca;Fil: Ridruejo, Ezequiel. Universidad Austral; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. CEMIC-CONICET. Centro de Educaciones Médicas e Investigaciones Clínicas "Norberto Quirno". CEMIC-CONICET; ArgentinaFil: Wahlin, Staffan. No especifíca

Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on liver cancer management (CERO-19).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems and it may have heavily impacted patients with liver cancer (LC). Herein, we evaluated whether the schedule of LC screening or procedures has been interrupted or delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: An international survey evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical practice and clinical trials from March 2020 to June 2020, as the first phase of a multicentre, international, and observational project. The focus was on patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, cared for around the world during the first COVID-19 pandemic wave. RESULTS: Ninety-one centres expressed interest to participate and 76 were included in the analysis, from Europe, South America, North America, Asia, and Africa (73.7%, 17.1%, 5.3%, 2.6%, and 1.3% per continent, respectively). Eighty-seven percent of the centres modified their clinical practice: 40.8% the diagnostic procedures, 80.9% the screening programme, 50% cancelled curative and/or palliative treatments for LC, and 41.7% modified the liver transplantation programme. Forty-five out of 69 (65.2%) centres in which clinical trials were running modified their treatments in that setting, but 58.1% were able to recruit new patients. The phone call service was modified in 51.4% of centres which had this service before the COVID-19 pandemic (n = 19/37). CONCLUSIONS: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a tremendous impact on the routine care of patients with liver cancer. Modifications in screening, diagnostic, and treatment algorithms may have significantly impaired the outcome of patients. Ongoing data collection and future analyses will report the benefits and disadvantages of the strategies implemented, aiding future decision-making. LAY SUMMARY: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to healthcare systems globally. Herein, we assessed the impact of the first wave pandemic on patients with liver cancer and found that routine care for these patients has been majorly disrupted, which could have a significant impact on outcomes

Sofosbuvir-based antiviral therapy in patients with recurrent HCV infection after liver transplant: A real-life experience

Introduction and aim: Recurrent HCV infection after liver transplant (LT) has a negative impact on graft and patient survival. The aim of this study is to describe the efficacy and safety of sofosbuvir (SOF-based) regimens in the treatment of recurrent HCV after liver transplant (LT). Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 68 adults with recurrent HCV infection after LT, treated with different SOF-based regimens between March 2015 and December 2016. The choice of regimens, their duration and use of ribavirin (RBV) was made by the treating physician. The efficacy of antiviral treatment was assessed based on the sustained viral response obtained 12 weeks after the end of treatment (SVR12), according to an intention-to-treat analysis. Results: The most frequent HCV genotypes were 1 and 3 (n = 35, 51.4% and n = 31, 45.6%, respectively). Only 22 patients were treatment naïve (32.3%) and 7 had cirrhosis (10.2%). SOF + daclatasvir (DCV) was the most commonly used regimen (n = 63, 92.6%). Most patients used RBV (n = 56, 82.3%) and were treated for 12 weeks (n = 66, 97%). Overall SVR12 was 95.5% (65/68 patients). Three patients had virologic failure. Three patients had serious adverse events, however, no one discontinued treatment prematurely. RBV-related anaemia was the most frequent adverse event (n = 34, 50%). Four patients had severe cellular graft rejection after HCV elimination, while immunosuppression remained stable. Conclusion: SOF-based therapy is highly effective and safe to treat HCV recurrence after LT. Cellular graft rejection following the successful treatment of HCV needs further investigation

WGO Guidance for the Care of Patients With COVID-19 and Liver Disease

Contains fulltext : 228593.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access

WGO guidance for the care of patients with COVID-19 and liver disease

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the least deadly but most infectious coronavirus strain transmitted from wild animals. It may affect many organ systems. Aim of the current guideline is to delineate the effects of SARS-CoV-2 on the liver. Asymptomatic aminotransferase elevations are common in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease. Its pathogenesis may be multifactorial. It may involve primary liver injury and indirect effects such as bystander hepatitis, myositis, toxic liver injury, hypoxia, and preexisting liver disease. Higher aminotransferase elevations, lower albumin, and platelets have been reported in severe compared with mild COVID-19. Despite the dominance of respiratory disease, acute on chronic liver disease/acute hepatic decompensation have been reported in patients with COVID-19 and preexisting liver disease, in particular cirrhosis. Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) has a higher risk of respiratory disease progression than those without MAFLD. Alcohol-associated liver disease may be severely affected by COVID-19-such patients frequently have comorbidities including metabolic syndrome and smoking-induced chronic lung disease. World Gastroenterology Organization (WGO) recommends that interventional procedures such as endoscopy and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography should be performed in emergency cases or when they are considered strictly necessary such as high risk varices or cholangitis. Hepatocellular cancer surveillance may be postponed by 2 to 3 months. A short delay in treatment initiation and non-surgical approaches should be considered. Liver transplantation should be restricted to patients with high MELD scores, acute liver failure and hepatocellular cancer within Milan criteria. Donors and recipients should be tested for SARS-CoV-2 and if found positive donors should be excluded and liver transplantation postponed until recovery from infection

High Prevalence of Multidrug Resistant Bacteria in Cirrhotic Patients with Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis: Is It Time to Change the Standard Antimicrobial Approach?

Introduction. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) has a deleterious clinical impact in end-stage liver disease, and multidrug resistance has increased, raising concern about effectiveness of traditional antibiotic regimens. Patients and Methods. Single-center retrospective study of ascitic fluid infections in cirrhotic patients. Results. We analyzed medical records related to 2129 culture-positive ascitic fluid and found 183 samples from cirrhotic patients. There were 113 monobacterial SBP cases from 97 cirrhotic patients; 57% of patients were male; hepatitis C and alcohol were the main etiologies for cirrhosis. Multidrug resistant bacteria were isolated in 46.9% of SBP samples, and third-generation cephalosporin and quinolone resistant reached 38.9% and 25.7% of SBP cases. Conclusion. SBP due to multidrug resistant bacteria is a growing problem, and one should consider reported resistance profiles for the decision-making process of empirical first-line treatment prescription