The Liver Frailty Index: a model for establishing organ-specific frailty metrics across all solid organ transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: In this review, we discuss the development of the Liver Frailty Index (LFI) and how it may serve as a model for developing other organ-specific frailty indices. RECENT FINDINGS: As the demand for solid organ transplants continues to increase, the transplantation community is enhancing its strategies for organ allocation to gain deeper insights into patient risk profiles and anticipated outcomes. Frailty has emerged as a critical concept in transplant care, offering valuable insights into adverse health outcomes. Standardizing frailty assessment across transplant programs could enhance prognostic accuracy and inform pretransplant interventions.The LFI comprises of three performance-based tests that each represents essential components of the multidimensional frailty construct. This composite metric provides insights beyond liver function and considers nonhepatic comorbid factors. Identifying common frailty principles among all transplant candidates and adopting the LFI methodology, which assesses fundamental frailty principles using liver-specific tools, could establish a foundational pool of shared core frailty principles. From this pool, organ-specific frailty indices could be derived, each equipped with the clinically relevant organ-specific tools to evaluate common core principles. SUMMARY: Creating a standardized framework across all solid-organ transplants, with common principles and organ-specific measurements, would facilitate consistent frailty assessment, standardize the integration of the frailty construct into transplant decision-making, and enable center-level interventions to improve outcomes for patients with end-stage organ disease.

Do Age and Sex Influence Anorectal Manometry Parameters?

BACKGROUND: High-resolution anorectal manometry (HRM) is widely used in the evaluation of anal incontinence and constipation, which become increasingly prevalent with age. However, the impact of age and comorbidities on physiological digestive parameters remains poorly understood. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of age on anorectal function. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on patients at our digestive motility clinic between January 2016 and May 2019. All patients with a normal HRM were included. Clinical data and HRM parameters were collected in a database. Multivariate regression analyses were performed to evaluate the effects of age, sex, medical comorbidities and obstetric history on anorectal HRM parameters. KEY RESULTS: One hundred and forty-four patients were included (mean age: 53 ± 16 years, 72% females). The main indications for anorectal HRM were incontinence (44%), constipation (37%) and anorectal pain (9%). Age was significantly associated with higher maximum tolerable volume (ß = +0.48 mL year-1, P = 0.04) and higher rectal compliance (ß = +0.04 mL year-1, P = 0.01). Independently from age and medical comorbidities, female demonstrated significantly lower mean endurance squeeze pressure (ß = -44.4 mmHg, P < 0.001), maximal squeeze pressure (ß = -62.3 mmHg; P < 0.001), volume at first urge (ß = -16.7 mL, P = 0.02) and maximum tolerable volume (ß = -16.1 mL, P = 0.046). Vaginal birth was associated with lower tolerable maximum pressure (ß = -39.4 mmHg, P = 0.046). CONCLUSION: Age and sex are independent factors which influence anorectal HRM parameters. These findings should be taken into consideration when interpreting anorectal HRM.

Lidocaine before esophageal manometry and ambulatory pH monitoring: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Lidocaine is commonly applied to improve the tolerance of esophageal manometry (EM) and ambulatory pH monitoring (PM). We recently published data suggesting a benefit to this practice and we aimed to confirm these findings in a randomized trial. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial of lidocaine nasal spray versus placebo (saline) before EM and PM. Patients referred to our center who met inclusion criteria were enrolled. Patients were asked to fill a questionnaire after their test and patient-reported adverse effects were compared. KEY RESULTS: Three hundred and four patients were enrolled in our trial. Lidocaine and placebo groups were demographically similar. The primary outcome, pain during catheter insertion, occurred in 60/148 (40.5%) patients in the lidocaine group versus in 72/152 (47.4%) patients in the placebo group (OR: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.48-1.20]; p = 0.23). Patients receiving lidocaine were less likely to report nausea during test recording (OR: 0.48 [95% CI: 0.24-0.91]; p = 0.02) and reported slightly lower intensity of pain during both catheter insertion and test recording (4.68 ± 2.06 versus 5.41 ± 2.24 on 10; p = 0.048 and 3.71 ± 2.00 versus 4.93 ± 2.55 on 10; p = 0.03, respectively). Furthermore, patients receiving lidocaine were less likely to report their test as globally uncomfortable and painful (57% vs. 75%; p = 0.003 and 14% vs. 21%; p = 0.02, respectively). No events of systemic lidocaine toxicity occurred during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of lidocaine before esophageal function tests does not reduce pain during catheter insertion but may provide other modest benefits with limited toxicity.

IgG4-associated autoimmune hepatitis and cholangitis: A relatively novel entity to consider in cases of seronegative autoimmune hepatitis.

A 49-year-old woman with no inflammatory bowel disease history presented to our clinic with abnormal liver function tests and right upper quadrant abdominal pain. Blood tests revealed a mixed pattern of liver injury. Abdominal magnetic resonance imaging demonstrated hepatomegaly with periportal edema and hyper-enhancing bile ducts without any sign of biliary obstruction or stricturing. Screening for viral hepatitis and autoimmune liver diseases was negative. An elevated immunoglobulin G (IgG) level suggested the possibility of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), and a biopsy confirmed the presence of severe interface hepatitis with necrotic areas and focal lymphoid nodular formation. IgG4 staining revealed marked IgG4-positive plasma cell infiltration. A diagnosis of IgG4-associated seronegative AIH was made, and the patient was started on prednisone and azathioprine, with rapid resolution of the enzyme abnormalities. This clinical vignette highlights the potential challenges in establishing a diagnosis of IgG4-associated AIH and cholangitis, as demonstrated by the importance of confirmatory histopathology. Clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion when confronted with a mixed pattern of liver injury with elevated immunoglobulins but seronegative autoimmune markers.