Screening and surveillance of oesophageal varices in patients with HCV-positive liver cirrhosis successfully treated by direct-acting antiviral agents.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: limited evidence is available to guide hepatologists regarding endoscopic surveillance of oesophageal varices (EV) in Hepatitis C Virus (HCV)-positive cirrhotic patients achieving a sustained virologic response. To address these issues, we conducted a long-term prospective study on 427 HCV-positive cirrhotic patients successfully treated by Direct Antiviral Agents (DAAs). METHODS: Patients were divided into two groups according to their baseline Baveno VI status: Group 1 (92, 21.5%, favourable Baveno VI status) and Group 2 (335, 78.5%, unfavourable Baveno VI status). Each patient underwent baseline endoscopy and was endoscopically monitored for a median follow-up of 65.2 months according to Baveno VI recommendations. RESULTS: About 4.3% of Group 1 patients showed baseline EV compared with 30.1% of Group 2 patients (p < .0001). No patients belonging to Group 1 without baseline EV developed EV at follow-up endoscopy compared with 6.5% in Group 2 patients (p = .02); 69/107 (64.5%) patients with baseline EV showed small varices. During the endoscopic follow-up, EV disappeared/improved in 36 (33.6%), were stable in 39 (36.4%) and worsened in 32 (29.9%) patients, all belonging to Group 2 (p = .001). Improvement in Baveno VI status was observed in 118/335 (35.2%, p < .0001) of Group 2 patients and among those without pre-therapy EV, none developed EV throughout the follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: HCV-positive cirrhotic patients cured by DAAs showing baseline favourable Baveno VI status and no worsening during follow-up can safely avoid endoscopic screening and surveillance. Patients having unfavourable Baveno VI status without baseline EV who improve their status may suspend further endoscopic surveillance.

Training in advanced bilio-pancreatic endoscopy.

As the clinical applications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) take more and more root in everyday practice and these endoscopic procedures become increasingly more complex and interventional with a higher chance for complications, the demand for expert biliopancreatic endoscopists continues to increase. In response to this growing need, specific postgraduate fellowships have been developed, however the standardization of training programs and the assessment of the achieved competence still remains an open debate. ERCP and EUS competency often requires training beyond the scope of a standard GI fellowship program, which lasts at least 1-2 years, and there are some differences in the way to face the issues of advanced biliopancreatic endoscopy training between Europe, America and the Asian regions. Today there is no role for the self-teaching of ERCP and EUS through trial and error without supervision and, in the near future, it is necessary to critically revise current training guidelines, to establish a standardized curriculum for advanced biliopancreatic endoscopists and to implement universally validated skill assessment tools, able to ensure constant and targeted feedback to trainees.

The prognostic role of hepatic venous pressure gradient in cirrhotic patients undergoing elective extrahepatic surgery.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Surgery in cirrhosis is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Retrospectively reported prognostic factors include emergency procedures, liver function (MELD/Child-Pugh scores) and portal hypertension (assessed by indirect markers). This study assessed the prognostic role of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and other variables in elective extrahepatic surgery in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: A total of 140 patients with cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A/B/C: 59/37/4%), who were due to have elective extrahepatic surgery (121 abdominal; 9 cardiovascular/thoracic; 10 orthopedic and others), were prospectively included in 4 centers (2002-2011). Hepatic and systemic hemodynamics (HVPG, indocyanine green clearance, pulmonary artery catheterization) were assessed prior to surgery, and clinical and laboratory data were collected. Patients were followed-up for 1 year and mortality, transplantation, morbidity and post-surgical decompensation were studied. RESULTS: Ninety-day and 1-year mortality rates were 8% and 17%, respectively. Variables independently associated with 1-year mortality were ASA class (American Society of Anesthesiologists), high-risk surgery (defined as open abdominal and cardiovascular/thoracic) and HVPG. These variables closely predicted 90-, 180- and 365-day mortality (C-statistic >0.8). HVPG values >16 mmHg were independently associated with mortality and values ≥20 mmHg identified a subgroup at very high risk of death (44%). Twenty-four patients presented persistent or de novo decompensation at 3 months. Low body mass index, Child-Pugh class and high-risk surgery were associated with death or decompensation. No patient with HVPG <10 mmHg or indocyanine green clearance >0.63 developed decompensation. CONCLUSIONS: ASA class, HVPG and high-risk surgery were prognostic factors of 1-year mortality in cirrhotic patients undergoing elective extrahepatic surgery. HVPG values >16 mmHg, especially ≥20 mmHg, were associated with a high risk of post-surgical mortality. LAY SUMMARY: The hepatic venous pressure gradient is associated with outcomes in patients with cirrhosis undergoing elective extrahepatic surgery. It enables a better stratification of risk in these patients and provides the foundations for potential interventions to improve post-surgical outcomes.

Liver stiffness-based model for portal hypertension and hepatocellular cancer risk in HBV responsive to antivirals.

BACKGROUND: In hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related cirrhosis the antiviral therapy reduces portal hypertension (PH) and risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). This study assessed the prognostic role of LSPS Score (liver stiffness value X spleen diameter/platelet count) in predicting these goals in cirrhotic patients responsive to antiviral therapy. METHODS: The correlation between LSPS, PH, esophageal varices (EVs) and HCC was evaluated in 121 cirrhotic patients treated with nucleos(t)ide analogues (NUCs). Sixty-one patients (50.4%) had PH at baseline. All were HBV DNA negative on-treatment. They were evaluated after a median of 8 years of therapy (1-17) for LSPS, PH, hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), EVs and HCC. RESULTS: LSPS ≤0.62 and ≤1.4 identified patients without PH measured by HVPG (<6 mmHg, NPV=100%) and EVs (PPV 63.3%, NPV 93.7%), respectively. After antiviral therapy LSPS≤0.62 was detected in 51.3% of the patients (16.4% and 76.6% of subjects with and without PH at baseline, P<0.0001). HCC developed in 26 patients (21.5%, 2.6%-year) with a higher incidence in patients with LSPS>0.62 after antiviral therapy (36% vs. 7%, P<0.001). On multivariate analysis LSPS post-therapy and PH at baseline were the only independent predictors of HCC (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.02-1.28, P=0.02 and OR: 1.70; 95% CI:1-2.86, P=0.04 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: LSPS is useful to identify patients with regression of PH and EVs, avoiding endoscopy. LSPS≤0.62 at baseline or due to antiviral therapy is associated with a lower risk of HCC. Early antiviral treatment is recommended in order to maintain or to induce LSPS≤0.62.

Usefulness of thromboelastometry in predicting the risk of bleeding in cirrhotics who undergo invasive procedures.

OBJECTIVES: The management of patients with liver cirrhosis undergoing invasive procedures is controversial and haemostasis assessment using routine laboratory is inappropriate. We evaluated the following: (a) the ability of thromboelastometry to predict the risk of bleeding in cirrhotic patients undergoing invasive procedures and enable a decision on the prophylactic transfusional strategy; (b) the contribution of platelet adhesion and aggregation tests in the assessment of haemostasis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seventeen cirrhotic patients undergoing invasive procedures were analyzed retrospectively (training set). To obtain preliminary data, an observational study was carried out in 58 patients (test set). All 75 patients were evaluated by thromboelastometry. Platelet adhesion and aggregation were evaluated in 16 patients using Multiplate, PFA-100 and Light Transmission Aggregometry. Factor VIII was dosed in all patients of the test set. RESULTS: In the training set, thromboelastometry confirmed the haemostatic assessment shown by the conventional test only in 6/17 (35%) patients. In the test set, thromboelastometry identified all patients who had a bleeding event. In patients with a high risk of bleeding, the use of thromboelastometry was cost-effective, reducing the platelet infusions by 64%. Platelet adhesion/aggregation abnormalities were observed in 15/16 (94%) patients, but bleeding events occurred only in 2/15 (13%) patients. CONCLUSION: Thromboelastometry appears to be useful to screen cirrhotic patients undergoing invasive procedures to identify the risk of bleeding and to optimize the transfusional strategy. Adhesion/aggregation tests are not useful in identifying patients at risk of bleeding and their application is not cost-effective.

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs management before gastrointestinal endoscopy: do clinicians adhere to current guidelines?

BACKGROUND: Managing antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs before endoscopy may be challenging. AIMS: To assess whether the pre-endoscopic management of antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs is adherent to current guidelines and the influence of patients' characteristics, referring physician's specialty, type of endoscopic procedure and therapeutic regimen on adherence. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty patients taking aspirin, thienopyridines or warfarin and scheduled for upper endoscopy (± biopsies), variceal band ligation, colonoscopy (± biopsies or polypectomy), were prospectively analyzed. RESULTS: In 109 patients (49.5%) the management of antiplatelet/anticoagulant drugs was thoroughly compliant with guidelines. Neither demographic characteristics, nor in/outpatient status, nor type of endoscopic procedure, nor physician's specialty influenced the adherence but the therapeutic regimen had a significant impact (p < 0.0001) as compliance was less likely in patients on warfarin. Unwarranted drugs withholding was more frequent before colonoscopy than upper endoscopy (p = 0.0001). Warfarin was stopped longer than recommended more frequently than aspirin (p = 0.009). The International Normalized Ratio was properly checked before endoscopy in 47.7% of patients. Among the 55 patients who withheld warfarin, the decision about bridging to low molecular weight heparin was appropriate in 21 (38.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Compliance with guidelines is low especially in the management of warfarin, both among gastroenterologists and other physicians.

Prospective randomized trial: endoscopic follow up 3 vs 6 months after esophageal variceal eradication by band ligation in cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is recommended to treat esophageal varices (EV) in cirrhosis and portal hypertension. A program of endoscopic surveillance is not clearly established. The aim of this prospective randomized trial was to assess the most effective timing of endoscopic monitoring after variceal eradication and its impact on the patient's outcome and on the costs. METHODS: A hundred and two cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices treated by EVL were evaluated. After variceal eradication patients were randomized to receive first endoscopic control at 3 (Group 1) and 6 (Group 2) months respectively. RESULTS: Variceal obliteration was achieved in all patients. Variceal recurrence was observed in 28 cases at the first control (29.1%) without difference between the two groups (32% vs 29% in group 1 and 2 respectively, p=0.75). The incidence of large varices is similar in the two groups (33% vs 38% respectively). Using a multivariate analysis, medical therapy with B blockers was the only independent predictor of lowest risk of variceal recurrence [OR 2.30, 95% CI (1.68-3.26)]. Bleeding related to recurrent varices occurred in 3.1% of cases and was associated with portal thrombosis. Child Pugh score ≥8 was the only predictor of mortality (p=0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence of varices after banding ligation is not rare but it is associated with a low risk of variceal progression and bleeding. Accordingly, a first endoscopic control at 6 months after variceal eradication associated with a good risk stratification might be a cost-effective strategy of monitoring.

Viral load at the time of liver transplantation and risk of hepatitis B virus recurrence.

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence after liver transplantation is significantly reduced by prophylaxis with hepatitis B immune globulins (HBIG) or antiviral drugs in nonreplicating patients and by the combination of both drugs in replicating patients. However, the load of HBV DNA, which defines replicating status in patients undergoing liver transplantation, remains unclear. This study analyzes the correlation between the viral load, tested with a single amplified assay, at the time of liver transplantation, and the risk of hepatitis B recurrence in 177 HBV carriers who underwent transplantation in a single center from 1990 to 2002. Overall, HBV relapsed after surgery in 15 patients (8.5%) with a 5- and 8-year actuarial rate of recurrence of 8% and 21%, respectively. After liver transplantation hepatitis B recurred in 9% of 98 selected subjects treated only with immune globulins and in 8% of 79 viremic patients who received immune globulins and lamivudine (P = NS). A linear correlation was observed between recurrence and viral load at the time of surgery. In transplant patients with HBV DNA higher than 100,000 copies/mL, 200-99,999 copies/mL, and DNA undetectable by amplified assay, hepatitis B recurred in 50%, 7.5%, and 0% of patients, respectively. Overall, a viral load higher than 100,000 copies/mL at the time of liver transplantation was significantly associated with hepatitis B recurrence (P = .0003). In conclusion, spontaneous or antiviral-induced HBV DNA viral load at the time of surgery classifies the risk of HBV recurrence after liver transplantation and indicates the best prophylaxis strategy.