RESUMO
The liver is bathed in bacterial products, including lipopolysaccharide transported from the intestinal portal vasculature, but maintains a state of tolerance that is exploited by persistent pathogens and tumours1-4. The cellular basis mediating this tolerance, yet allowing a switch to immunity or immunopathology, needs to be better understood for successful immunotherapy of liver diseases. Here we show that a variable proportion of CD8+ T cells compartmentalized in the human liver co-stain for CD14 and other prototypic myeloid membrane proteins and are enriched in close proximity to CD14high myeloid cells in hepatic zone 2. CD14+CD8+ T cells preferentially accumulate within the donor pool in liver allografts, among hepatic virus-specific and tumour-infiltrating responses, and in cirrhotic ascites. CD14+CD8+ T cells exhibit increased turnover, activation and constitutive immunomodulatory features with high homeostatic IL-10 and IL-2 production ex vivo, and enhanced antiviral/anti-tumour effector function after TCR engagement. This CD14+CD8+ T cell profile can be recapitulated by the acquisition of membrane proteins-including the lipopolysaccharide receptor complex-from mononuclear phagocytes, resulting in augmented tumour killing by TCR-redirected T cells in vitro. CD14+CD8+ T cells express integrins and chemokine receptors that favour interactions with the local stroma, which can promote their induction through CXCL12. Lipopolysaccharide can also increase the frequency of CD14+CD8+ T cells in vitro and in vivo, and skew their function towards the production of chemotactic and regenerative cytokines. Thus, bacterial products in the gut-liver axis and tissue stromal factors can tune liver immunity by driving myeloid instruction of CD8+ T cells with immunomodulatory ability.
Assuntos
Linfócitos T CD8-Positivos , Tolerância Imunológica , Receptores de Lipopolissacarídeos , Lipopolissacarídeos , Fígado , Células Mieloides , Humanos , Linfócitos T CD8-Positivos/citologia , Linfócitos T CD8-Positivos/efeitos dos fármacos , Linfócitos T CD8-Positivos/imunologia , Linfócitos T CD8-Positivos/metabolismo , Receptores de Lipopolissacarídeos/metabolismo , Lipopolissacarídeos/imunologia , Lipopolissacarídeos/farmacologia , Células Mieloides/imunologia , Células Mieloides/metabolismo , Neoplasias/imunologia , Neoplasias/patologia , Receptores de Antígenos de Linfócitos T/imunologia , Receptores de Antígenos de Linfócitos T/metabolismo , Tolerância Imunológica/efeitos dos fármacos , Tolerância Imunológica/imunologia , Fígado/efeitos dos fármacos , Fígado/imunologia , Fígado/patologia , Fígado/virologia , Interleucina-2/biossíntese , Interleucina-2/imunologia , Quimiotaxia de Leucócito , Bactérias/imunologia , Intestinos/imunologia , Intestinos/microbiologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To assess the benefits and harms of laparoscopic or robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for people with benign, premalignant, and malignant disease.
Assuntos
Laparoscopia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Pancreaticoduodenectomia , Lesões Pré-Cancerosas , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/métodos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Laparoscopia/efeitos adversos , Lesões Pré-Cancerosas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/métodos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos/efeitos adversos , Pancreatopatias/cirurgiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM) has a complex relationship with pancreatic cancer. This study examines the impact of preoperative DM, both recent-onset and pre-existing, on long-term outcomes following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple's (RAW) study, a multi-centre cohort of PD for pancreatic head malignancy (2012-2015). Recurrence and five-year survival rates of patients with DM were compared to those without, and subgroup analysis performed to compare patients with recent-onset DM (less than one year) to patients with established DM. RESULTS: Out of 758 patients included, 187 (24.7%) had DM, of whom, 47 of the 187 (25.1%) had recent-onset DM. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula (DM: 5.9% vs no DM 9.8%; p = 0.11), five-year survival (DM: 24.1% vs no DM: 22.9%; p = 0.77) or five-year recurrence (DM: 71.7% vs no DM: 67.4%; p = 0.32). There was also no difference between patients with recent-onset DM and patients with established DM in postoperative outcomes, recurrence, or survival. CONCLUSION: We found no difference in five-year recurrence and survival between diabetic patients and those without diabetes. Patients with pre-existing DM should be evaluated for PD on a comparable basis to non-diabetic patients.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Pancreaticoduodenectomia , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/mortalidade , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidade , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologia , Masculino , Feminino , Idoso , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidade , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/complicações , Fatores de Tempo , Fatores de Risco , Diabetes Mellitus , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
These guidelines for the diagnosis and management of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology liver section. The guideline writing committee included a multidisciplinary team of experts from various specialties involved in the management of CCA, as well as patient/public representatives from AMMF (the Cholangiocarcinoma Charity) and PSC Support. Quality of evidence is presented using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) format. The recommendations arising are to be used as guidance rather than as a strict protocol-based reference, as the management of patients with CCA is often complex and always requires individual patient-centred considerations.
Assuntos
Neoplasias dos Ductos Biliares , Colangiocarcinoma , Gastroenterologia , Humanos , Colangiocarcinoma/diagnóstico , Colangiocarcinoma/terapia , Neoplasias dos Ductos Biliares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias dos Ductos Biliares/terapia , Ductos Biliares Intra-HepáticosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is recommended in fit patients with a resectable ampullary adenocarcinoma (AA). We aimed to identify predictors of five-year recurrence/survival. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Recurrence After Whipple's (RAW) study, a multicentre retrospective study of PD patients with a confirmed head of pancreas or periampullary malignancy (June 1st, 2012-May 31st, 2015). Patients with AA who developed recurrence/died within five-years were compared to those who did not. RESULTS: 394 patients were included and actual five-year survival was 54%. Recurrence affected 45% and the median time-to-recurrence was 14 months. Local only, local and distant, and distant only recurrence affected 34, 41 and 94 patients, respectively (site unknown: 7). Among those with recurrence, the most common sites were the liver (32%), local lymph nodes (14%) and lung/pleura (13%). Following multivariable tests, number of resected nodes, histological T stage > II, lymphatic invasion, perineural invasion (PNI), peripancreatic fat invasion (PPFI) and ≥1 positive resection margin correlated with increased recurrence and reduced survival. Furthermore, ≥1 positive margin, PPFI and PNI were all associated with reduced time-to-recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: This multicentre retrospective study of PD outcomes identified numerous histopathological predictors of AA recurrence. Patients with these high-risk features might benefit from adjuvant therapy.
Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma , Ampola Hepatopancreática , Neoplasias do Ducto Colédoco , Neoplasias Duodenais , Humanos , Pancreaticoduodenectomia/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Ampola Hepatopancreática/cirurgia , Ampola Hepatopancreática/patologia , Neoplasias Duodenais/patologia , Recidiva Local de Neoplasia/patologia , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Tissue-resident memory T cells (TRM) are vital immune sentinels that provide protective immunity. While hepatic CD8+ TRM have been well described, little is known about the location, phenotype and function of CD4+ TRM. DESIGN: We used multiparametric flow cytometry, histological assessment and novel human tissue coculture systems to interrogate the ex vivo phenotype, function and generation of the intrahepatic CD4+ T-cell compartment. We also used leukocytes isolated from human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-disparate liver allografts to assess long-term retention. RESULTS: Hepatic CD4+ T cells were delineated into three distinct populations based on CD69 expression: CD69-, CD69INT and CD69HI. CD69HICD4+ cells were identified as tissue-resident CD4+ T cells on the basis of their exclusion from the circulation, phenotypical profile (CXCR6+CD49a+S1PR1-PD-1+) and long-term persistence within the pool of donor-derived leukcoocytes in HLA-disparate liver allografts. CD69HICD4+ T cells produced robust type 1 polyfunctional cytokine responses on stimulation. Conversely, CD69INTCD4+ T cells represented a more heterogenous population containing cells with a more activated phenotype, a distinct chemokine receptor profile (CX3CR1+CXCR3+CXCR1+) and a bias towards interleukin-4 production. While CD69INTCD4+ T cells could be found in the circulation and lymph nodes, these cells also formed part of the long-term resident pool, persisting in HLA-mismatched allografts. Notably, frequencies of CD69INTCD4+ T cells correlated with necroinflammatory scores in chronic hepatitis B infection. Finally, we demonstrated that interaction with hepatic epithelia was sufficient to generate CD69INTCD4+ T cells, while additional signals from the liver microenvironment were required to generate liver-resident CD69HICD4+ T cells. CONCLUSIONS: High and intermediate CD69 expressions mark human hepatic CD4+ TRM and a novel functionally distinct recirculating population, respectively, both shaped by the liver microenvironment to achieve diverse immunosurveillance.
Assuntos
Linfócitos T CD4-Positivos , Fígado , Linfócitos T CD8-Positivos , Citocinas/imunologia , Humanos , Memória Imunológica , Fígado/imunologia , Monitorização ImunológicaRESUMO
Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matching is not routinely performed for liver transplantation as there is no consistent evidence of benefit; however, the impact of HLA mismatching remains uncertain. We explored the effect of class I and II HLA mismatching on graft failure and mortality. A total of 1042 liver transplants performed at a single center between 1999 and 2016 with available HLA typing data were included. The median follow-up period was 9.38 years (interquartile range 4.9-14) and 350/1042 (33.6%) transplants resulted in graft loss and 280/1042 (26.9%) in death. Graft loss and mortality were not associated with the overall number of mismatches at HLA-A, HLA-B, HLA-C, HLA-DR, and HLA-DQ loci. However, graft failure and mortality were both increased in HLA mismatching on graft failure and mortality the presence of one (p = 0.004 and p = 0.01, respectively) and two (p = 0.01 and p = 0.04, respectively) HLA-A mismatches. Elevated hazard ratios for graft failure and death were observed with HLA-A mismatches in univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models. Excess graft loss with HLA-A mismatch (138/940 [14.7%] mismatched compared with 6/102 [5.9%] matched transplants) occurred within the first year following transplantation (odds ratio 2.75; p = 0.02). Strikingly, transplants performed at a single all grafts lost due to hepatic artery thrombosis were in HLA-A-mismatched transplants (31/940 vs. 0/102), as were those lost due to sepsis (35/940 vs. 0/102). In conclusion, HLA-A mismatching was associated with increased graft loss and mortality. The poorer outcome for the HLA-mismatched group was due to hepatic artery thrombosis and sepsis, and these complications occurred exclusively with HLA-A-mismatched transplants. These data suggest that HLA-A mismatching is important for outcomes following liver transplant. Therefore, knowledge of HLA-A matching status may potentially allow for enhanced surveillance, clinical interventions in high-risk transplants or stratified HLA-A matching in high-risk recipients.
Assuntos
Rejeição de Enxerto , Antígenos HLA-A , Hepatopatias , Transplante de Fígado , Sepse , Trombose , Rejeição de Enxerto/etiologia , Sobrevivência de Enxerto , Antígenos HLA , Artéria Hepática/cirurgia , Humanos , Transplante de Fígado/efeitos adversos , Sepse/etiologia , Trombose/etiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: It has long been debated whether cava anastomosis should be performed with the piggyback technique or cava replacement, with or without veno-venous bypass (VVB), with or without temporary portocaval shunt (PCS) in the setting of liver transplantation. OBJECTIVES: To identify whether different cava anastomotic techniques and other maneuvers benefit the recipient regarding short-term outcomes and to provide international expert panel recommendations. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Central. METHODS: A systematic review following PRISMA guidelines and recommendations using the GRADE approach derived from an international expert panel (CRD42021240979). RESULTS: Of 3205 records screened, 307 publications underwent full-text assessment for eligibility and 47 were included in qualitative synthesis. Four studies were randomized control trials. Eighteen studies were comparative. The remaining 25 were single-center retrospective noncomparative studies. CONCLUSION: Based on existing data and expert opinion, the panel cannot recommend one cava reconstruction technique over another, rather the surgical approach should be based on surgeon preference and center dependent, with special consideration toward patient circumstances (Quality of evidence: Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong). The panel recommends against routine use of vevo-venous bypass (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong) and against the routine use of temporary porto-caval shunt (Quality of evidence: Very Low | Grade of Recommendation: Strong).
Assuntos
Kava , Transplante de Fígado , Humanos , Transplante de Fígado/métodos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Derivação Portocava Cirúrgica , Anastomose Cirúrgica/métodos , Veia Cava Inferior/cirurgiaRESUMO
PURPOSE: To assess the safety and tolerability of a vandetanib-eluting radiopaque embolic (BTG-002814) for transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) in patients with resectable liver malignancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The VEROnA clinical trial was a first-in-human, phase 0, single-arm, window-of-opportunity study. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years and had resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (Child-Pugh A) or metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patients received 1 mL of BTG-002814 transarterially (containing 100 mg of vandetanib) 7-21 days prior to surgery. The primary objectives were to establish the safety and tolerability of BTG-002814 and determine the concentrations of vandetanib and the N-desmethyl vandetanib metabolite in the plasma and resected liver after treatment. Biomarker studies included circulating proangiogenic factors, perfusion computed tomography, and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: Eight patients were enrolled: 2 with HCC and 6 with mCRC. There was 1 grade 3 adverse event (AE) before surgery and 18 after surgery; 6 AEs were deemed to be related to BTG-002814. Surgical resection was not delayed. Vandetanib was present in the plasma of all patients 12 days after treatment, with a mean maximum concentration of 24.3 ng/mL (standard deviation ± 13.94 ng/mL), and in resected liver tissue up to 32 days after treatment (441-404,000 ng/g). The median percentage of tumor necrosis was 92.5% (range, 5%-100%). There were no significant changes in perfusion imaging parameters after TACE. CONCLUSIONS: BTG-002814 has an acceptable safety profile in patients before surgery. The presence of vandetanib in the tumor specimens up to 32 days after treatment suggests sustained anticancer activity, while the low vandetanib levels in the plasma suggest minimal release into the systemic circulation. Further evaluation of this TACE combination is warranted in dose-finding and efficacy studies.
Assuntos
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Quimioembolização Terapêutica , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Adolescente , Adulto , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/tratamento farmacológico , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/terapia , Quimioembolização Terapêutica/efeitos adversos , Quimioembolização Terapêutica/métodos , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamento farmacológico , Neoplasias Hepáticas/terapia , Piperidinas , Inibidores de Proteínas Quinases/efeitos adversos , Quinazolinas/efeitos adversos , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Right-sided colonic tumours appear to have poorer survival after resection of colorectal liver metastases, although this may be confounded by various factors including advanced stage and emergency presentation. METHODS: Medical records of consecutive patients undergoing resection of colorectal liver metastases at a single centre from 2008 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were categorised by primary tumour location (right colon, left colon, rectum). Each primary location was weighted using propensity scores to balance covariates, including staging and mode of presentation. Cox regression was then applied to derive multivariable hazard ratios (HR) of survival after liver resection. Primary outcomes were 10-year overall survival (OS) and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) after liver resection based on PTL. RESULTS: 414 patients were included in the analysis. Left colonic tumours were significantly associated with higher rates of bilobar liver metastasis (36.2% vs. 20.1% and 30.1%) and larger maximum size of liver metastases compared with rectal and right-sided tumours, respectively. There was no difference in rates of extra-hepatic metastases, recurrence in the liver after resection or RAS, BRAF or p53 mutational status. After propensity weighting and Cox-regression, right-sided tumours were independently associated with significantly reduced 10 year OS (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.03-2.36, p = 0.04) but not 5 year DFS (HR 1.36, 95% CI 0.89-2.08, p = 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with left colonic and rectal tumours, right-sided colonic tumours are independently associated with inferior OS after resection of CRLM. This is despite higher rates of bilobar liver metastases and larger metastases with left-sided tumours.
Assuntos
Neoplasias do Colo , Neoplasias Colorretais , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Neoplasias do Colo/cirurgia , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Hepatectomia , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundário , Prognóstico , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% to 95% of people with liver cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed within about one to three years after diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, including, among others, endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, and balloon tamponade. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the individual and relative benefits and harms of these treatments. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis, through a network meta-analysis; and to generate rankings of the different treatments for acute bleeding oesophageal varices, according to their benefits and harms. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until 17 December 2019, to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in people with cirrhosis and acute bleeding from oesophageal varices. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only RCTs (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and acutely bleeding oesophageal varices. We excluded RCTs in which participants had bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those in whom initial haemostasis was achieved before inclusion into the trial, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS software, using Bayesian methods, and calculated the differences in treatments using odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed also the direct comparisons from RCTs using the same codes and the same technical details. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 52 RCTs (4580 participants) in the review. Forty-eight trials (4042 participants) were included in one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those with and without a previous history of bleeding. We included outcomes assessed up to six weeks. All trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 19 interventions were compared in the trials (sclerotherapy, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues, variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade, somatostatin analogues plus variceal band ligation, nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, no active intervention, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade plus somatostatin analogues, balloon tamponade plus vasopressin analogues, variceal band ligation plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus variceal band ligation, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and sclerotherapy plus vasopressin analogues). We have reported the effect estimates for the primary and secondary outcomes when there was evidence of differences between the interventions against the reference treatment of sclerotherapy, but reported the other results of the primary and secondary outcomes versus the reference treatment of sclerotherapy without the effect estimates when there was no evidence of differences in order to provide a concise summary of the results. Overall, 15.8% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment of sclerotherapy (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) died during the follow-up periods, which ranged from three days to six weeks. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.57, 95% CrI 1.04 to 2.41; network estimate; direct comparison: 4 trials; 353 participants) and vasopressin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.70, 95% CrI 1.13 to 2.62; network estimate; direct comparison: 2 trials; 438 participants). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, a higher proportion of people receiving balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy had more serious adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 4.23, 95% CrI 1.22 to 17.80; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 60 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, people receiving vasopressin analogues alone and those receiving variceal band ligation had fewer adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.96; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 219 participants; and rate ratio 0.40, 95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 77 participants; respectively). Based on low-certainty evidence, the proportion of people who developed symptomatic rebleed was smaller in people who received sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.94; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 105 participants). The evidence suggests considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons where sclerotherapy was the control intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone and vasopressin analogues alone (with supportive therapy) probably result in increased mortality, compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, vasopressin analogues alone and band ligation alone probably result in fewer adverse events compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy may result in large increases in serious adverse events compared to sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues may result in large decreases in symptomatic rebleed compared to sclerotherapy. In the remaining comparisons, the evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the interventions, compared to sclerotherapy.
Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/complicações , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Adulto , Teorema de Bayes , Viés , Terapia Combinada/métodos , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/mortalidade , Humanos , Ligadura/efeitos adversos , Metanálise em Rede , Nitratos/uso terapêutico , Razão de Chances , Derivação Portossistêmica Transjugular Intra-Hepática , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Escleroterapia/efeitos adversos , Escleroterapia/métodos , Escleroterapia/mortalidade , Somatostatina/análogos & derivados , Vasopressinas/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of nonalcohol-related fatty liver disease (NAFLD) varies between 19% and 33% in different populations. NAFLD decreases life expectancy and increases the risks of liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and requirement for liver transplantation. There is uncertainty surrounding the relative benefits and harms of various lifestyle interventions for people with NAFLD. OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different lifestyle interventions in the treatment of NAFLD through a network meta-analysis, and to generate rankings of the different lifestyle interventions according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until February 2021 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with NAFLD. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in people with NAFLD, whatever the method of diagnosis, age, and diabetic status of participants, or presence of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We planned to perform a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and to calculate the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and rate ratios (RaRs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available-participant analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. However, the data were too sparse for the clinical outcomes. We therefore performed only direct comparisons (head-to-head comparisons) with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 59 randomised clinical trials (3631 participants) in the review. All but two trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 33 different interventions, ranging from advice to supervised exercise and special diets, or a combination of these and no additional intervention were compared in these trials. The reference treatment was no active intervention. Twenty-eight trials (1942 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The follow-up ranged from 1 month to 24 months. The remaining trials did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. The follow-up period in the trials that reported clinical outcomes was 2 months to 24 months. During this short follow-up period, clinical events related to NAFLD such as mortality, liver cirrhosis, liver decompensation, liver transplantation, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver-related mortality were sparse. This is probably because of the very short follow-up periods. It takes a follow-up of 8 years to 28 years to detect differences in mortality between people with NAFLD and the general population. It is therefore unlikely that differences by clinical outcomes will be noted in trials with less than 5 years to 10 years of follow-up. In one trial, one participant developed an adverse event. There were no adverse events in any of the remaining participants in this trial, or in any of the remaining trials, which seemed to be directly related to the intervention. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the lifestyle interventions compared with no additional intervention (to general public health advice) on any of the clinical outcomes after a short follow-up period of 2 months to 24 months in people with nonalcohol-related fatty liver disease. Accordingly, high-quality randomised clinical trials with adequate follow-up are needed. We propose registry-based randomised clinical trials or cohort multiple randomised clinical trials (a study design in which multiple interventions are trialed within large longitudinal cohorts of participants to gain efficiencies and align trials more closely to standard clinical practice), comparing aerobic exercise and dietary advice versus standard of care (exercise and dietary advice received as part of national health promotion). The reason for the choice of aerobic exercise and dietary advice is the impact of these interventions on indirect outcomes which may translate to clinical benefit. The outcomes in such trials should be mortality, health-related quality of life, decompensated liver cirrhosis, liver transplantation, and resource use measures including costs of intervention and decreased healthcare use after a minimum follow-up of eight years, to find meaningful differences in the clinically important outcomes.
Assuntos
Estilo de Vida , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/terapia , Teorema de Bayes , Viés , Restrição Calórica , Dieta com Restrição de Carboidratos , Dieta Mediterrânea , Exercício Físico , Seguimentos , Humanos , Metanálise em Rede , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/complicações , Razão de Chances , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Treinamento Resistido , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of non-alcohol-related fatty liver disease (NAFLD) varies between 19% and 33% in different populations. NAFLD decreases life expectancy and increases risks of liver cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and the requirement for liver transplantation. Uncertainty surrounds relative benefits and harms of various nutritional supplements in NAFLD. Currently no nutritional supplement is recommended for people with NAFLD. OBJECTIVES: ⢠To assess the benefits and harms of different nutritional supplements for treatment of NAFLD through a network meta-analysis ⢠To generate rankings of different nutritional supplements according to their safety and efficacy SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until February 2021 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with NAFLD. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) for people with NAFLD, irrespective of method of diagnosis, age and diabetic status of participants, or presence of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods whenever possible and calculated differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HRs), odds ratios (ORs), and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included in the review a total of 202 randomised clinical trials (14,200 participants). Nineteen trials were at low risk of bias. A total of 32 different interventions were compared in these trials. A total of 115 trials (7732 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The remaining trials did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. Follow-up ranged from 1 month to 28 months. The follow-up period in trials that reported clinical outcomes was 2 months to 28 months. During this follow-up period, clinical events related to NAFLD such as mortality, liver cirrhosis, liver decompensation, liver transplantation, hepatocellular carcinoma, and liver-related mortality were sparse. We did not calculate effect estimates for mortality because of sparse data (zero events for at least one of the groups in the trial). None of the trials reported that they measured overall health-related quality of life using a validated scale. The evidence is very uncertain about effects of interventions on serious adverse events (number of people or number of events). We are very uncertain about effects on adverse events of most of the supplements that we investigated, as the evidence is of very low certainty. However, people taking PUFA (polyunsaturated fatty acid) may be more likely to experience an adverse event than those not receiving an active intervention (network meta-analysis results: OR 4.44, 95% CrI 2.40 to 8.48; low-certainty evidence; 4 trials, 203 participants; direct evidence: OR 4.43, 95% CrI 2.43 to 8.42). People who take other supplements (a category that includes nutritional supplements other than vitamins, fatty acids, phospholipids, and antioxidants) had higher numbers of adverse events than those not receiving an active intervention (network meta-analysis: rate ratio 1.73, 95% CrI 1.26 to 2.41; 6 trials, 291 participants; direct evidence: rate ratio 1.72, 95% CrI 1.25 to 2.40; low-certainty evidence). Data were sparse (zero events in all groups in the trial) for liver transplantation, liver decompensation, and hepatocellular carcinoma. So, we did not perform formal analysis for these outcomes. The evidence is very uncertain about effects of other antioxidants (antioxidants other than vitamins) compared to no active intervention on liver cirrhosis (HR 1.68, 95% CrI 0.23 to 15.10; 1 trial, 99 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about effects of interventions in any of the remaining comparisons, or data were sparse (with zero events in at least one of the groups), precluding formal calculations of effect estimates. Data were probably because of the very short follow-up period (2 months to 28 months). It takes follow-up of 8 to 28 years to detect differences in mortality between people with NAFLD and the general population. Therefore, it is unlikely that differences in clinical outcomes are noted in trials providing less than 5 to 10 years of follow-up. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about effects of nutritional supplementation compared to no additional intervention on all clinical outcomes for people with non-alcohol-related fatty liver disease. Accordingly, high-quality randomised comparative clinical trials with adequate follow-up are needed. We propose registry-based randomised clinical trials or cohort multiple randomised clinical trials (study design in which multiple interventions are trialed within large longitudinal cohorts of patients to gain efficiencies and align trials more closely to standard clinical practice) comparing interventions such as vitamin E, prebiotics/probiotics/synbiotics, PUFAs, and no nutritional supplementation. The reason for the choice of interventions is the impact of these interventions on indirect outcomes, which may translate to clinical benefit. Outcomes in such trials should be mortality, health-related quality of life, decompensated liver cirrhosis, liver transplantation, and resource utilisation measures including costs of intervention and decreased healthcare utilisation after minimum follow-up of 8 years (to find meaningful differences in clinically important outcomes).
Assuntos
Suplementos Nutricionais , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/terapia , Teorema de Bayes , Viés , Suplementos Nutricionais/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Metanálise em Rede , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/complicações , Razão de Chances , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years. There are several different treatments to prevent bleeding, including: beta-blockers, endoscopic sclerotherapy, and variceal band ligation. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for prevention of first variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for prevention of first variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers to December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices with no history of bleeding. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices with no history of bleeding. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previous bleeding from oesophageal varices and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation or previously received prophylactic treatment for oesophageal varices. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR), and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed the direct comparisons from randomised clinical trials using the same codes and the same technical details. MAIN RESULTS: We included 66 randomised clinical trials (6653 participants) in the review. Sixty trials (6212 participants) provided data for one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those at high risk of bleeding from oesophageal varices. The follow-up in the trials that reported outcomes ranged from 6 months to 60 months. All but one of the trials were at high risk of bias. The interventions compared included beta-blockers, no active intervention, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates, nitrates, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, and portocaval shunt. Overall, 21.2% of participants who received non-selective beta-blockers ('beta-blockers') - the reference treatment (chosen because this was the most common treatment compared in the trials) - died during 8-month to 60-month follow-up. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, and beta-blockers plus nitrates all had lower mortality versus no active intervention (beta-blockers: HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.67; direct comparison HR: 0.59, 95% CrI 0.42 to 0.83; 10 trials, 1200 participants; variceal band ligation: HR 0.51, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.74; direct comparison HR 0.49, 95% CrI 0.12 to 2.14; 3 trials, 355 participants; sclerotherapy: HR 0.66, 95% CrI 0.51 to 0.85; direct comparison HR 0.61, 95% CrI 0.41 to 0.90; 18 trials, 1666 participants; beta-blockers plus nitrates: HR 0.41, 95% CrI 0.20 to 0.85; no direct comparison). No trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation had a higher number of serious adverse events (number of events) than beta-blockers (rate ratio 10.49, 95% CrI 2.83 to 60.64; 1 trial, 168 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers plus nitrates had a higher number of 'any adverse events (number of participants)' than beta-blockers alone (OR 3.41, 95% CrI 1.11 to 11.28; 1 trial, 57 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, adverse events (number of events) were higher in sclerotherapy than in beta-blockers (rate ratio 2.49, 95% CrI 1.53 to 4.22; direct comparison rate ratio 2.47, 95% CrI 1.27 to 5.06; 2 trials, 90 participants), and in beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation than in beta-blockers (direct comparison rate ratio 1.72, 95% CrI 1.08 to 2.76; 1 trial, 140 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, any variceal bleed was lower in beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation than in beta-blockers (direct comparison HR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.04 to 0.71; 1 trial, 173 participants). Based on low-certainty evidence, any variceal bleed was higher in nitrates than beta-blockers (direct comparison HR 6.40, 95% CrI 1.58 to 47.42; 1 trial, 52 participants). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy, and beta-blockers plus nitrates may decrease mortality compared to no intervention in people with high-risk oesophageal varices in people with cirrhosis and no previous history of bleeding. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in a higher number of serious adverse events than beta-blockers. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of beta-blockers versus variceal band ligation on variceal bleeding. The evidence also indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in most of the remaining comparisons.
Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/complicações , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/prevenção & controle , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Prevenção Primária , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/efeitos adversos , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/uso terapêutico , Viés , Terapia Combinada/métodos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Humanos , Ligadura , Metanálise em Rede , Nitratos/uso terapêutico , Derivação Portocava Cirúrgica , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , EscleroterapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years of diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, which include endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and surgical portocaval shunts, among others. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for secondary prevention of variceal bleeding in adults with previous oesophageal variceal bleeding due to decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for secondary prevention according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and a previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had no previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices, previous history of bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those who had acute bleeding at the time of treatment, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 48 randomised clinical trials (3526 participants) in the review. Forty-six trials (3442 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies. The follow-up ranged from two months to 61 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 12 interventions were compared in these trials (sclerotherapy, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, no active intervention, TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt), beta-blockers plus nitrates, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy plus nitrates). Overall, 22.5% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) of sclerotherapy died during the follow-up period ranging from two months to 61 months. There was considerable uncertainty in the effects of interventions on mortality. Accordingly, none of the interventions showed superiority over another. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in fewer serious adverse events (number of people) than sclerotherapy (OR 0.19; 95% CrI 0.06 to 0.54; 1 trial; 100 participants). Based on low or very low-certainty evidence, the adverse events (number of participants) and adverse events (number of events) may be different across many comparisons; however, these differences are due to very small trials at high risk of bias showing large differences in some comparisons leading to many differences despite absence of direct evidence. Based on low-certainty evidence, TIPS may result in large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation (HR 0.12; 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.41; 1 trial; 58 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, any variceal rebleed was probably lower in sclerotherapy than in no active intervention (HR 0.62; 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.99, direct comparison HR 0.66; 95% CrI 0.11 to 3.13; 3 trials; 296 participants), beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy than sclerotherapy alone (HR 0.60; 95% CrI 0.37 to 0.95; direct comparison HR 0.50; 95% CrI 0.07 to 2.96; 4 trials; 231 participants); TIPS than sclerotherapy (HR 0.18; 95% CrI 0.08 to 0.38; direct comparison HR 0.22; 95% CrI 0.01 to 7.51; 2 trials; 109 participants), and in portocaval shunt than sclerotherapy (HR 0.21; 95% CrI 0.05 to 0.77; no direct comparison) groups. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more, other compensation, events than sclerotherapy (rate ratio 2.37; 95% CrI 1.35 to 4.67; 1 trial; 65 participants and rate ratio 2.30; 95% CrI 1.20 to 4.65; 2 trials; 109 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions including those related to beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation in the remaining comparisons. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions on mortality. Variceal band ligation might result in fewer serious adverse events than sclerotherapy. TIPS might result in a large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation. Sclerotherapy probably results in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than no active intervention. Beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy and TIPS probably result in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than sclerotherapy. Beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more other compensation events than sclerotherapy. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons. Accordingly, high-quality randomised comparative clinical trials are needed.
Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/complicações , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/prevenção & controle , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Metanálise em Rede , Derivação Portossistêmica Transjugular Intra-Hepática , Prevenção Secundária/métodos , Antagonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Viés , Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/mortalidade , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiologia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/mortalidade , Humanos , Ligadura/efeitos adversos , Ligadura/métodos , Transplante de Fígado/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nitratos/uso terapêutico , Derivação Portossistêmica Transjugular Intra-Hepática/estatística & dados numéricos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Escleroterapia/efeitos adversos , Escleroterapia/mortalidadeRESUMO
The development, evaluation, and eventual deployment of novel medical devices is a complex process involving various areas of expertise. Although the need for a User Centred Design approach to the development of both hardware and software has long been established, both current regulatory guidelines and widespread evaluation approaches fail to reflect the challenges encountered during day-to-day clinical practice. As such, the results from these evaluations may not provide a realistic account of the problems encountered by users when introduced to clinical practice. In this paper, we present a case study on designing the evaluation of a novel device to support laparoscopic liver surgery. Through a reflective account of the design of our usability evaluation, we identify and describe seven primary dimensions of ecological validity encountered in clinical usability evaluations. These dimensions are: 'user roles', 'environment', 'training', 'scenario', 'patient involvement', 'software', and 'hardware'. We analyse three recently published clinical usability evaluation articles to assess (and illustrate) the applicability and completeness of these dimensions. Finally, we discuss the compromises encountered during clinical usability evaluations and how to best report on these considerations. The framework presented here aims to further the agenda of ecologically valid evaluation practice, reflecting the constraints of medical practice.
Assuntos
Software , Interface Usuário-Computador , HumanosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 2.5% of all hospitalisations in people with liver cirrhosis are for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is associated with significant short-term mortality; therefore, it is important to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people at high risk of developing it. Antibiotic prophylaxis forms the mainstay preventive method, but this has to be balanced against the development of drug-resistant spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, which is difficult to treat, and other adverse events. Several different prophylactic antibiotic treatments are available; however, there is uncertainty surrounding their relative efficacy and optimal combination. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different prophylactic antibiotic treatments for prevention of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in people with liver cirrhosis using a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different prophylactic antibiotic treatments according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers to November 2018 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis at risk of developing spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis undergoing prophylactic treatment to prevent spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation, or were receiving antibiotics for treatment of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis or other purposes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 randomised clinical trials (3896 participants; nine antibiotic regimens (ciprofloxacin, neomycin, norfloxacin, norfloxacin plus neomycin, norfloxacin plus rifaximin, rifaximin, rufloxacin, sparfloxacin, sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim), and 'no active intervention' in the review. Twenty-three trials (2587 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies, with or without other features of decompensation, having ascites with low protein or previous history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 1 to 12 months. Many of the trials were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was low or very low. Overall, approximately 10% of trial participants developed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis and 15% of trial participants died. There was no evidence of differences between any of the antibiotics and no intervention in terms of mortality (very low certainty) or number of serious adverse events (very low certainty). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or the proportion of people with serious adverse events. There was no evidence of differences between any of the antibiotics and no intervention in terms of proportion of people with 'any adverse events' (very low certainty), liver transplantation (very low certainty), or the proportion of people who developed spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (very low certainty). The number of 'any' adverse events per participant was fewer with norfloxacin (rate ratio 0.74, 95% CrI 0.59 to 0.94; 4 trials, 546 participants; low certainty) and sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim (rate ratio 0.19, 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.81; 1 trial, 60 participants; low certainty) versus no active intervention. There was no evidence of differences between the other antibiotics and no intervention in the number of 'any' adverse events per participant (very low certainty). There were fewer other decompensation events with rifaximin versus no active intervention (rate ratio 0.61, 65% CrI 0.46 to 0.80; 3 trials, 575 participants; low certainty) and norfloxacin plus neomycin (rate ratio 0.06, 95% CrI 0.00 to 0.33; 1 trial, 22 participants; low certainty). There was no evidence of differences between the other antibiotics and no intervention in the number of decompensations events per participant (very low certainty). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life or development of symptomatic spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. One would expect some correlation between the above outcomes, with interventions demonstrating effectiveness across several outcomes. This was not the case. The possible reasons for this include sparse data and selective reporting bias, which makes the results unreliable. Therefore, one cannot draw any conclusions from these inconsistent differences based on sparse data. There was no evidence of any differences in the subgroup analyses (performed when possible) based on whether the prophylaxis was primary or secondary. FUNDING: the source of funding for five trials were organisations who would benefit from the results of the study; six trials received no additional funding or were funded by neutral organisations; and the source of funding for the remaining 18 trials was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is considerable uncertainty about whether antibiotic prophylaxis is beneficial, and if beneficial, which antibiotic prophylaxis is most beneficial in people with cirrhosis and ascites with low protein or history of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid postrandomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, health-related quality of life, and decompensation events.
Assuntos
Antibioticoprofilaxia , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Peritonite/etiologia , Peritonite/prevenção & controle , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Teorema de Bayes , Humanos , Transplante de Fígado , Metanálise em Rede , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Liver transplantation is considered the definitive treatment for people with liver failure. As part of post-liver transplantation management, immunosuppression (suppressing the host immunity) is given to prevent graft rejections. Immunosuppressive drugs can be classified into those that are used for a short period during the beginning phase of immunosuppression (induction immunosuppression) and those that are used over the entire lifetime of the individual (maintenance immunosuppression), because it is widely believed that graft rejections are more common during the first few months after liver transplantation. Some drugs such as glucocorticosteroids may be used for both induction and maintenance immunosuppression because of their multiple modalities of action. There is considerable uncertainty as to whether induction immunosuppression is necessary and if so, the relative efficacy of different immunosuppressive agents. OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative benefits and harms of different induction immunosuppressive regimens in adults undergoing liver transplantation through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different induction immunosuppressive regimens according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until July 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in adults undergoing liver transplantation. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults undergoing liver transplantation. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had multivisceral transplantation and those who already had graft rejections. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio (OR), rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) based on an available case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 25 trials (3271 participants; 8 treatments) in the review. Twenty-three trials (3017 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people undergoing primary liver transplantation for various indications and excluded those with HIV and those with renal impairment. The follow-up in the trials ranged from three to 76 months, with a median follow-up of 12 months among trials. All except one trial were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was very low. Overall, approximately 7.4% of people who received the standard regimen of glucocorticosteroid induction died and 12.2% developed graft failure. All-cause mortality and graft failure was lower with basiliximab compared with glucocorticosteroid induction: all-cause mortality (HR 0.53, 95% CrI 0.31 to 0.93; network estimate, based on 2 direct comparison trials (131 participants; low-certainty evidence)); and graft failure (HR 0.44, 95% CrI 0.28 to 0.70; direct estimate, based on 1 trial (47 participants; low-certainty evidence)). There was no evidence of differences in all-cause mortality and graft failure between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). There was also no evidence of differences in serious adverse events (proportion), serious adverse events (number), renal failure, any adverse events (proportion), any adverse events (number), liver retransplantation, graft rejections (any), or graft rejections (requiring treatment) between other induction immunosuppressants and glucocorticosteroids in either the direct comparison or the network meta-analysis (very low-certainty evidence). However, because of the wide CrIs, clinically important differences in these outcomes cannot be ruled out. None of the studies reported health-related quality of life. FUNDING: the source of funding for 14 trials was drug companies who would benefit from the results of the study; two trials were funded by neutral organisations who have no vested interests in the results of the study; and the source of funding for the remaining nine trials was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on low-certainty evidence, basiliximab induction may decrease mortality and graft failure compared to glucocorticosteroids induction in people undergoing liver transplantation. However, there is considerable uncertainty about this finding because this information is based on small trials at high risk of bias. The evidence is uncertain about the effects of different induction immunosuppressants on other clinical outcomes, including graft rejections. Future randomised clinical trials should be adequately powered, employ blinding, avoid post-randomisation dropouts (or perform intention-to-treat analysis), and use clinically important outcomes such as mortality, graft failure, and health-related quality of life.
Assuntos
Imunossupressores/administração & dosagem , Transplante de Fígado , Imunologia de Transplantes , Teorema de Bayes , Humanos , Terapia de Imunossupressão/métodos , Metanálise em Rede , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 20% of people with cirrhosis develop ascites. Several different treatments are available; including, among others, paracentesis plus fluid replacement, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, aldosterone antagonists, and loop diuretics. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their relative efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To compare the benefits and harms of different treatments for ascites in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for ascites according to their safety and efficacy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until May 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and ascites. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and ascites. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had previously undergone liver transplantation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the odds ratio, rate ratio, and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 49 randomised clinical trials (3521 participants) in the review. Forty-two trials (2870 participants) were included in one or more outcomes in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies, without other features of decompensation, having mainly grade 3 (severe), recurrent, or refractory ascites. The follow-up in the trials ranged from 0.1 to 84 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias, and the overall certainty of evidence was low or very low. Approximately 36.8% of participants who received paracentesis plus fluid replacement (reference group, the current standard treatment) died within 11 months. There was no evidence of differences in mortality, adverse events, or liver transplantation in people receiving different interventions compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (very low-certainty evidence). Resolution of ascites at maximal follow-up was higher with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (HR 9.44; 95% CrI 1.93 to 62.68) and adding aldosterone antagonists to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (HR 30.63; 95% CrI 5.06 to 692.98) compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (very low-certainty evidence). Aldosterone antagonists plus loop diuretics had a higher rate of other decompensation events such as hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, and variceal bleeding compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement (rate ratio 2.04; 95% CrI 1.37 to 3.10) (very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials using paracentesis plus fluid replacement reported health-related quality of life or symptomatic recovery from ascites. FUNDING: the source of funding for four trials were industries which would benefit from the results of the study; 24 trials received no additional funding or were funded by neutral organisations; and the source of funding for the remaining 21 trials was unclear. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low-certainty evidence, there is considerable uncertainty about whether interventions for ascites in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis decrease mortality, adverse events, or liver transplantation compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis and ascites. Based on very low-certainty evidence, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt and adding aldosterone antagonists to paracentesis plus fluid replacement may increase the resolution of ascites compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement. Based on very low-certainty evidence, aldosterone antagonists plus loop diuretics may increase the decompensation rate compared to paracentesis plus fluid replacement.
Assuntos
Ascite/terapia , Cirrose Hepática/complicações , Metanálise em Rede , Paracentese/métodos , Derivação Portossistêmica Transjugular Intra-Hepática/métodos , Ascite/etiologia , Teorema de Bayes , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Novel hepatoprotective strategies are needed to improve clinical outcomes during liver surgery. There is mixed data on the role of remote ischemic preconditioning (RIPC). We investigated RIPC in partial hepatectomy for primary hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: This was a Phase II, single-center, sham-controlled, randomized controlled trial (RCT). The primary hypothesis was that RIPC would reduce acute liver injury following surgery indicated by serum alanine transferase (ALT) 24 h following hepatectomy in patients with primary HCC, compared to sham. Patients were randomized to receive either four cycles of 5 min/5 min arm cuff inflation/deflation immediately prior to surgery, or sham. Secondary endpoints included clinical, biochemical and pathological outcomes. Liver function measured by Indocyanine Green pulse densitometry was performed in a subset of patients. RESULTS: 24 and 26 patients were randomized to RIPC and control groups respectively. The groups were balanced for baseline characteristics, except the duration of operation was longer in the RIPC group. Median ALT at 24 h was similar between groups (196 IU/L IQR 113.5-419.5 versus 172.5 IU/L IQR 115-298 respectively, p = 0.61). Groups were similar in secondary endpoints. CONCLUSION: This RCT did not demonstrate beneficial effects with RIPC on serum ALT levels 24 h after partial hepatectomy.