The Survival Benefit of Reabstinence After Harmful Alcohol Use Following Early Liver Transplant for Severe Alcohol-Associated Hepatitis: A Multicenter ACCELERATE Study.

INTRODUCTION: Early (i.e., without mandated period of abstinence) liver transplant (LT) for alcohol-associated hepatitis is the fastest-growing indication for LT in the United States and Europe. Harmful alcohol use after LT is associated with poor outcomes, but the distinction of establishing abstinence after return to drinking (i.e., reabstinence) is understudied. This study aims to characterize the survival outcomes of achieving reabstinence after post-LT harmful alcohol use. METHODS: We analyzed early LT recipients from 12 US LT centers between 2006 and 2021. Post-LT alcohol use was characterized as harmful using criteria of "binge" (≥5 [men] or ≥4 [women] drinks in < 24 hours) or "frequent" (≥4 days in one week) by interview or phosphatidylethanol >20 ng/mL. Reabstinence was defined as ≥12 consecutive months without harmful alcohol use after harmful alcohol use. RESULTS: Among 347 LT recipients (64% male, median age 43, median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium score 38) with median post-LT follow-up of 2.2 years (interquartile interval 1.1-3.6), 276 (80%) recipients had no evidence of harmful alcohol use, 35 (10%) recipients had reabstinence, and 36 (10%) recipients had continued harmful alcohol use without reabstinence. Five-year predicted survival, adjusted for age, sex, and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Sodium score, was lowest among LT recipients with continued harmful alcohol use (77%), but similar among those with no harmful use (93%) and reabstinence (94%). DISCUSSION: Achieving reabstinence after post-LT harmful alcohol use is associated with similar 5-year post-LT survival compared with those without evidence of post-LT harmful alcohol use. Our findings highlight the importance of early detection and treatment of post-LT alcohol use.

Deploying a metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis consensus care pathway: findings from an educational pilot in three health systems.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), formerly referred to as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, impacts 30% of the global population. This educational pilot focused on the role primary care providers may play in the delivery of guidelines-based metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) care. OBJECTIVE: Accelerate the application of guidelines-based MASH care pathways to clinical workflows. METHODS: A panel of six hepatologists was convened in 2021 to develop the care pathway and the subsequent pilot occurred between 2022 - 2023. The pilot was conducted across three U.S. health systems: Boston Medical Center (Boston), Methodist Health System (Dallas), and Weill Cornell Medicine (New York). Clinicians were educated on the care pathway and completed baseline/follow-up assessments. 19 primary care clinicians participated in the educational pilot baseline assessment, nine primary care clinicians completed the two-month assessment, and 15 primary care clinicians completed the four-month assessment. The primary endpoint was to assess clinician-reported adherence to and satisfaction with the care pathway. The pilot was deemed exempt by the Western Consensus Group Institutional Review Board. RESULTS: At baseline, 38.10% (n = 8) of respondents felt they had received sufficient training on when to refer a patient suspected of metabolic dysfunction-associated liver disease to hepatology, and 42.86% (n = 9) had not referred any patients suspected of metabolic dysfunction-associated liver disease to hepatology within a month. At four months post-intervention, 79% (n = 15) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed they received sufficient training on when to refer a patient suspected of metabolic dysfunction-associated liver disease to hepatology, and there was a 25.7% increase in self-reported adherence to the institution's referral guidelines. Barriers to care pathway adherence included burden of manually calculating fibrosis-4 scores and difficulty ordering non-invasive diagnostics. CONCLUSIONS: With therapeutics anticipated to enter the market this year, health systems leadership must consider opportunities to streamline the identification, referral, and management of patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. Electronic integration of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis care pathways may address implementation challenges.

Clinician-Level Knowledge and Barriers to Hepatocellular Carcinoma Surveillance.

Importance: Surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis is underused. Identifying potentially modifiable factors to address barriers in HCC surveillance is critical to improve patient outcomes. Objective: To evaluate clinician-level factors contributing to underuse of HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included primary care clinicians (PCCs) and gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians at 5 safety-net health systems in the US. Clinicians were surveyed from March 15 to September 15, 2023, to assess knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, perceived barriers, and COVID-19-related disruptions in HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis. Data were analyzed from October to November 2023. Main Outcome and Measures: HCC surveillance knowledge was assessed with 6 questions querying the respondent's ability to correctly identify appropriate use of HCC surveillance. Attitudes, perceived barriers, and beliefs regarding HCC surveillance and perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic-related disruptions with HCC surveillance were assessed with a series of statements using a 4-point Likert scale and compared PCCs and gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians. Results: Overall, 347 of 1362 clinicians responded to the survey (25.5% response rate), among whom 142 of 237 (59.9%) were PCCs, 48 of 237 (20.3%) gastroenterology and hepatology, 190 of 236 (80.5%) were doctors of medicine and doctors of osteopathic medicine, and 46 of 236 (19.5%) were advanced practice clinicians. On HCC knowledge assessment, 144 of 270 (53.3%) scored 5 or more of 6 questions correctly, 37 of 48 (77.1%) among gastroenterology and hepatology vs 65 of 142 (45.8%) among PCCs (P < .001). Those with higher HCC knowledge scores were less likely to report barriers to HCC surveillance. PCCs were more likely to report inadequate time to discuss HCC surveillance (37 of 139 [26.6%] vs 2 of 48 [4.2%]; P = .001), difficulty identifying patients with cirrhosis (82 of 141 [58.2%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%]; P < .001), and were not up-to-date with HCC surveillance guidelines (87 of 139 [62.6%] vs 5 of 48 [10.4%]; P < .001) compared with gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians. While most acknowledged delays during the COVID-19 pandemic, 62 of 136 PCCs (45.6%) and 27 of 45 gastroenterology and hepatology clinicians (60.0%) reported that patients with cirrhosis could currently complete HCC surveillance without delays. Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, important gaps in knowledge and perceived barriers to HCC surveillance were identified. Effective delivery of HCC education to PCCs and health system-level interventions must be pursued in parallel to address the complex barriers affecting suboptimal HCC surveillance in patients with cirrhosis.