Rebleeding and mortality risk are increased by ACLF but reduced by pre-emptive TIPS.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The relationship between acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) and acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is poorly understood. Specifically, the prevalence and prognosis of ACLF in the context of AVB is unclear, while the role of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the management in patients with ACLF has not been described to date. METHODS: A multicenter, international, observational study was conducted in 2,138 patients from 34 centers between 2011 and 2015. ACLF was defined and graded according to the EASL-CLIF consortium definition. Placement of pre-emptive TIPS (pTIPS) was based on individual center policy. Patients were followed-up for 1 year, until death or liver transplantation. Cox regression and competing risk models (Gray's test) were used to identify independent predictors of rebleeding or mortality. RESULTS: At admission, 380/2,138 (17.8%) patients had ACLF according to EASL-CLIF criteria (grade 1: 38.7%; grade 2: 39.2%; grade 3: 22.1%). The 42-day rebleeding (19% vs. 10%; p <0.001) and mortality (47% vs. 10%; p <0.001) rates were higher in patients with ACLF and increased with ACLF grades. Of note, the presence of ACLF was independently associated with rebleeding and mortality. pTIPS placement improved survival in patients with ACLF at 42 days and 1 year. This effect was also observed in propensity score matching analysis of 66 patients with ACLF, of whom 44 received pTIPs and 22 did not. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter international real-life study identified ACLF at admission as an independent predictor of rebleeding and mortality in patients with AVB. Moreover, pTIPS was associated with improved survival in patients with ACLF and AVB. LAY SUMMARY: Acute variceal bleeding is a deadly complication of liver cirrhosis that results from severe portal hypertension. This study demonstrates that the presence of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is the strongest predictor of mortality in patients with acute variceal bleeding. Importantly, patients with ACLF and acute variceal (re)bleeding benefit from pre-emptive (early) placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt.

Characteristics of randomised trials on diseases in the digestive system registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: a retrospective analysis.

Objectives To evaluate the adequacy of reporting of protocols for randomised trials on diseases of the digestive system registered in http://ClinicalTrials.gov and the consistency between primary outcomes, secondary outcomes and sample size specified in http://ClinicalTrials.gov and published trials. Methods Randomised phase III trials on adult patients with gastrointestinal diseases registered before January 2009 in http://ClinicalTrials.gov were eligible for inclusion. From http://ClinicalTrials.gov all data elements in the database required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) member journals were extracted. The subsequent publications for registered trials were identified. For published trials, data concerning publication date, primary and secondary endpoint, sample size, and whether the journal adhered to ICMJE principles were extracted. Differences between primary and secondary outcomes, sample size and sample size calculations data in http://ClinicalTrials.gov and in the published paper were registered. Results 105 trials were evaluated. 66 trials (63%) were published. 30% of trials were registered incorrectly after their completion date. Several data elements of the required ICMJE data list were not filled in, with missing data in 22% and 11%, respectively, of cases concerning the primary outcome measure and sample size. In 26% of the published papers, data on sample size calculations were missing and discrepancies between sample size reporting in http://ClinicalTrials.gov and published trials existed. Conclusion The quality of registration of randomised controlled trials still needs improvement.

Can trial sequential monitoring boundaries reduce spurious inferences from meta-analyses?

BACKGROUND: Results from apparently conclusive meta-analyses may be false. A limited number of events from a few small trials and the associated random error may be under-recognized sources of spurious findings. The information size (IS, i.e. number of participants) required for a reliable and conclusive meta-analysis should be no less rigorous than the sample size of a single, optimally powered randomized clinical trial. If a meta-analysis is conducted before a sufficient IS is reached, it should be evaluated in a manner that accounts for the increased risk that the result might represent a chance finding (i.e. applying trial sequential monitoring boundaries). METHODS: We analysed 33 meta-analyses with a sufficient IS to detect a treatment effect of 15% relative risk reduction (RRR). We successively monitored the results of the meta-analyses by generating interim cumulative meta-analyses after each included trial and evaluated their results using a conventional statistical criterion (alpha = 0.05) and two-sided Lan-DeMets monitoring boundaries. We examined the proportion of false positive results and important inaccuracies in estimates of treatment effects that resulted from the two approaches. RESULTS: Using the random-effects model and final data, 12 of the meta-analyses yielded P > alpha = 0.05, and 21 yielded P alpha = 0.05. The monitoring boundaries eliminated all false positives. Important inaccuracies in estimates were observed in 6 out of 21 meta-analyses using the conventional P