Terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The definition and diagnostic criteria of hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) has undergone recent changes. A major vasoconstrictor, terlipressin, has recently been approved as pharmacotherapy for HRS-AKI in the United States. The purpose of this review is to familiarize the readers with these new diagnostic criteria of HRS-AKI, and how best to use terlipressin. RECENT FINDINGS: Terlipressin is effective either as bolus dosing or continuous infusion and can achieve reversal of HRS-AKI in approximately 40% of patients. Continuous infusion allows lower daily dose with equal efficacy and less side effects but not an approved mode of administration in the United States. Response to terlipressin in the randomized controlled trials was defined as repeat reduction of serum creatinine to less than 1.5 mg/dl. Newer studies will likely require response to treatment to be defined as a repeat serum creatinine to be less than 0.3 mg/dl from baseline. Terlipressin use is associated with ischemic side effects and potential for respiratory failure development. SUMMARY: Careful patient selection and close monitoring are necessary for its use. Response to terlipressin with HRS-AKI reversal is associated with improved outcomes with better survival and less requirement for renal replacement therapy.

Comparative efficacy of terlipressin and norepinephrine for treatment of hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

The treatment of choice for hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) is vasoconstrictor therapy in combination with albumin, preferably norepinephrine or terlipressin as recommended by recent guidelines. In the absence of larger head-to-head trials comparing the efficacy of terlipressin and norepinephrine, meta-analysis of smaller studies can provide insights needed to understand the comparative effects of these medications. Additionally, recent changes in the HRS diagnosis and treatment guidelines underscore the need for newer analyses comparing terlipressin and norepinephrine. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess reversal of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and 1-month mortality in subjects receiving terlipressin or norepinephrine for the management of HRS-AKI. We searched literature databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Embase, and ResearchGate, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 2007 to June 2023 on June 26, 2023. Only trials comparing norepinephrine and albumin with terlipressin and albumin for the treatment of HRS-AKI in adults were included, and trials without HRS reversal as an endpoint or nonresponders were excluded. Pairwise meta-analyses with the random effects model were conducted to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for HRS reversal and 1-month mortality as primary outcomes. Additional outcomes assessed, included HRS recurrence, predictors of response, and incidence of adverse events (AEs). We used the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for quality assessment. We included 7 RCTs with a total of 376 subjects with HRS-AKI or HRS type 1. This meta-analysis showed numerically higher rates of HRS reversal (OR 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.80-2.22]; P = 0.22) and short-term survival (OR 1.50, 95% CI [0.64-3.53]; P = 0.26) with terlipressin, though these results did not reach statistical significance. Terlipressin was associated with AEs such as abdominal pain and diarrhea, whereas norepinephrine was associated with cardiovascular AEs such as chest pain and ischemia. Most of the AEs were reversible with a reduction in dose or discontinuation of therapy across both arms. Of the terlipressin-treated subjects, 5.3% discontinued therapy due to serious AEs compared to 2.7% of the norepinephrine-treated subjects. Limitations of this analysis included small sample size and study differences in HRS-AKI diagnostic criteria. As more studies using the new HRS-AKI criteria comparing terlipressin and norepinephrine are completed, a clearer understanding of the comparability of these 2 therapies will emerge.

Decreased need for RRT in liver transplant recipients after pretransplant treatment of hepatorenal syndrome-type 1 with terlipressin.

Hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI), a serious complication of decompensated cirrhosis, has limited therapeutic options and significant morbidity and mortality. Terlipressin improves renal function in some patients with HRS-1, while liver transplantation (LT) is a curative treatment for advanced chronic liver disease. Renal failure post-LT requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) is a major risk factor for graft and patient survival. A post hoc analysis with a 12-month follow-up of LT recipients from a placebo-controlled trial of terlipressin (CONFIRM; NCT02770716) was conducted to evaluate the need for RRT and overall survival. Patients with HRS-1 were treated with terlipressin plus albumin or placebo plus albumin for up to 14 days. RRT was defined as any type of procedure that replaced kidney function. Outcomes compared between groups included the incidence of HRS-1 reversal, the need for RRT (pretransplant and posttransplant), and overall survival. Of the 300 patients in CONFIRM (terlipressin n = 199; placebo, n = 101), 70 (23%) underwent LT alone (terlipressin, n = 43; placebo, n = 27) and 5 had simultaneous liver-kidney transplant (terlipressin, n = 3, placebo, n = 2). The rate of HRS reversal was significantly higher in the terlipressin group compared with the placebo group (37%, n = 16 vs. 15%, n = 4; p = 0.033). The pretransplant need for RRT was significantly lower among those who received terlipressin ( p = 0.007). The posttransplant need for RRT, at 12 months, was significantly lower among those patients who received terlipressin and were alive at Day 365, compared to placebo ( p = 0.009). Pretransplant treatment with terlipressin plus albumin in patients with HRS-1 decreased the need for RRT pretransplant and posttransplant.

Terlipressin in the management of liver disease.

INTRODUCTION: Terlipressin is a synthetic vasopressin analog which has been recently approved in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome. Terlipressin stimulates vasopressin receptors located on the smooth muscle vasculature of the splanchnic circulation and renal tubules which results in splanchnic vasoconstriction with improved renal perfusion and antidiuretic activity, respectively. AREAS COVERED: In this review, we discuss available data regarding the FDA approved use of terlipressin, safety, and tolerability, as well as highlight alternative uses in chronic liver disease currently still under investigation. EXPERT OPINION: Terlipressin is more efficacious compared to other vasoactive agents including midodrine octreotide and norepinephrine in reversal of hepatorenal syndrome and improves short-term survival. Other potential applications of terlipressin's vasoconstrictor actions reported in the literature include management of variceal hemorrhage and other complications of portal hypertension.

Outcomes of patients with hepatorenal syndrome undergoing liver transplantation in the era of terlipressin.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of terlipressin in improving pre-liver transplant renal function in hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) has been well documented, however, its impact on post-transplant renal function remains poorly described. This study aims to describe the impact of HRS and terlipressin on post-liver transplant renal function and survival. METHODS: A single-centre, retrospective, observational study was conducted to identify post-transplant outcomes of patients diagnosed with HRS undergoing liver transplant (HRS cohort) and those undergoing transplant for non-HRS, non-hepatocellular carcinoma cirrhotic indications (comparator cohort) between January 1997 and March 2020. The primary outcome was serum creatinine at 180 days post-liver transplant. Other renal outcomes and overall survival were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: 109 patients with HRS and 502 comparator patients underwent liver transplant. The comparator cohort was younger than the HRS cohort (53 vs. 57 years, P < 0.001). The median creatinine at day 180 post-transplant was higher in the HRS transplant group (119 µmol/L vs. 103 µmol/L, P < 0.001), however, this association lost significance following multivariate analysis. Seven patients (7%) in the HRS cohort received a combined liver-kidney transplant. There was no significant difference in the 12-month post-transplant survival between the two groups (94% vs. 94%, P = 0.5). CONCLUSION: Patients with HRS treated with terlipressin who subsequently undergo liver transplantation have post-transplant renal and survival outcomes comparable to patients transplanted for cirrhosis without HRS. This study supports the practice of liver-only transplant in this cohort and the reservation of renal allografts for those who have primary renal disease.

Terlipressin in combination with albumin as a therapy for hepatorenal syndrome in patients aged 65 years or older.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Clinical data for older patients with advanced liver disease are limited. This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of terlipressin in patients aged ≥65 years with hepatorenal syndrome using data from 3 Phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled studies (OT-0401, REVERSE, CONFIRM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The pooled population of patients aged ≥65 years (terlipressin, n = 54; placebo, n = 36) was evaluated for hepatorenal syndrome reversal-defined as a serum creatinine level ≤1.5 mg/dL (≤132.6 µmol/L) while receiving terlipressin or placebo, without renal replacement therapy, liver transplantation, or death-and the incidence of renal replacement therapy (RRT). Safety analyses included an assessment of adverse events. RESULTS: Hepatorenal syndrome reversal was almost 2-times higher in terlipressin-treated patients compared with patients who received placebo (31.5% vs 16.7%; P = 0.143). Among surviving patients, the need for RRT was significantly reduced in the terlipressin group, with an almost 3-times lower incidence of RRT versus the placebo group (Day 90: 25.0% vs 70.6%; P = 0.005). Among 23 liver-transplant-listed patients, significantly fewer patients in the terlipressin versus placebo group needed RRT by Days 30 and 60 (P = 0.027 each). Fewer patients in the terlipressin group needed RRT post-transplant (P = 0.011). More terlipressin-treated patients who were listed for and received a liver transplant were alive and RRT-free by Day 90. No new safety signals were revealed in the older subpopulation compared with previously published data. CONCLUSIONS: Terlipressin therapy may lead to clinical improvements in highly vulnerable patients aged ≥65 years with hepatorenal syndrome. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBERS: OT-0401, NCT00089570; REVERSE, NCT01143246; CONFIRM, NCT02770716.

Low-dose continuous terlipressin infusion is effective and safer than intravenous bolus injections in reducing portal pressure and control of acute variceal bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Continuous infusion of terlipressin is better tolerated, and equally effective at lower doses than intravenous boluses in type 1 hepatorenal syndrome. This approach in cirrhosis patients with acute esophageal variceal bleed was investigated by comparing the efficacy and adverse events of continuous versus bolus administration of terlipressin. METHODS: One hundred ten consecutive cirrhosis patients with acute esophageal variceal bleed (AEVB) were randomized to receive either terlipressin as bolus (BOL, n = 55), 2 mg every 4 h, or, continuous infusion (CONI, n = 55), 4 mg/24 h for 5 days. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) was measured at baseline, 12 and 24 h and response to terlipressin was defined as > 10% decline from baseline. RESULTS: Baseline demographics, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and HVPG were comparable between groups. The primary objective of HVPG response at 24 h was achieved in significantly more patients in CONI than BOL group {47/55(85.4%) vs. 32/55(58.2%), p = 0.002}. Early HVPG response at 12 h was also higher in CONI group (71.5 vs. 49.1%, p < 0.01). Median dose of terlipressin was significantly lower {4.25 ± 1.26 mg vs. 7.42 ± 1.42 mg/24 h, p < 0.001)} and adverse events were fewer {20/55(36.3%) vs. 31/55(56.4%), p = 0.03} in the CONI than BOL group. Significantly higher incidence of very early rebleed was noted in BOL group {8/55 (14.5%) vs. 1/55, (1.8%), p = 0.03}. Baseline HVPG (OR 1.90, 95% CI = 1.25-2.89, p = 0.002) and MELD (OR 1.18, 95% CI = 0.99-1.41, p = 0.05) were predictors of rebleed. CONCLUSION: "HVPG-tailored" continuous terlipressin infusion is more effective than bolus administration in reducing HVPG at a lower dose with fewer adverse events in cirrhotic patients. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFIER: NCT02695862.

Efficacy and Safety of Vasopressin and Terlipressin in Preterm Neonates: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: The use of arginine vasopressin (AVP) and terlipressin to treat hypotension in preterm neonates is increasing. Our aim was to review the available evidence on the efficacy and safety of AVP and terlipressin for use in preterm neonates. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from inception to September 2021 were searched for studies of AVP and terlipressin in the treatment of hypotension of any cause in preterm neonates. Primary outcomes were improvement in end-organ perfusion and mortality. The risk of bias assessment and certainty of the evidence were performed using appropriate tools. RESULTS: Fifteen studies describing the use of AVP (n = 12) or terlipressin (n = 3) among 148 preterm neonates were included. Certainly, the available evidence for the primary outcome of end-organ perfusion rated as very low. AVP or terlipressin were used to treat 144 and 4 neonates, respectively. Improvement in markers of end-organ perfusion was reported in 143 (99%) neonates treated with AVP and 3 (75%) treated with terlipressin. The mortality rate was 41% (n = 59) and 50% (n = 2) for neonates who received AVP and terlipressin, respectively. Hyponatremia was the most frequently reported adverse event (n = 37, 25%). CONCLUSION: AVP and terlipressin may improve measured blood pressure values and possibly end-organ perfusion among neonates with refractory hypotension. However, the efficacy-safety balance of these drugs should be assessed on an individual basis and as per the underlying cause. Studies on the optimal dosing, efficacy, and safety of AVP and terlipressin in preterm neonates with variable underlying conditions are critically needed.

[Practice guidance for the use of terlipressin for liver cirrhosis-related complications (2021)].

Liver cirrhosis is a major global health burden worldwide due to its high risk of morbidity and mortality. Role of terlipressin for the management of liver cirrhosis related complications has been recognized during recent years. This paper aims to develop evidence-based clinical practice guidance on the use of terlipressin for liver cirrhosis related complications. Hepatobiliary Study Group of Chinese Society of Gastroenterology of Chinese Medical Association and Hepatology Committee of Chinese Research Hospital Association have invited gastroenterologists, hepatologists, infectious disease specialists, surgeons, and clinical pharmacists to formulate the clinical practice guidance based on comprehensive literature review and experts' clinical experiences. Overall, 10 major statements regarding efficacy and safety of terlipressin in liver cirrhosis were proposed. Terlipressin can be beneficial for the management of cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding and hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). However, the evidence regarding the use of terlipressin in cirrhotic patients with ascites, post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction, and bacterial infections and in those undergoing hepatic resection and liver transplantation remains insufficient. Terlipressin-related adverse events, mainly including gastrointestinal symptoms, electrolyte disturbance, and cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events, should be closely monitored. The current clinical practice guidance supports the use of terlipressin for gastroesophageal variceal bleeding and HRS in liver cirrhosis. High-quality studies are needed to further clarify its potential effects in other liver cirrhosis related complications.

Duodenal Necrosis and Nonvariceal Digestive Bleeding After Terlipressin Administration for Treatment of Hepatorenal Syndrome: a Case Report of a Novel Side Effect of a Commonly Used Drug.

BACKGROUND: Terlipressin is widely used for treatment of hepatorenal syndrome and variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients. However, it may be associated with side effects, especially those related to vasoconstriction, such as myocardial infarction or intestinal ischemia. This is a case report of a cirrhotic patient with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding after duodenal necrosis due to the use of terlipressin, a novel side effect not yet described in literature to the best of our knowledge. CASE REPORT: A 51-year-old male patient, with alcoholic liver cirrhosis and hepatitis C virus infection, was admitted presenting oliguria associated with severe ascites and lower limb edema. His Model for End Stage Liver Disease-Sodium score was 19 and his serum creatine level was 2.12 mg/dL. Albumin infusion was performed for 48 hours, but his serum creatinine level reached 3.46 mg/dL. Terlipressin infusion was started in continuous infusion and serum creatinine levels progressively decreased. However, the patient presented hemorrhagic shock secondary to hematemesis after 7 days. Upper digestive endoscopy showed an extensive ulcerated lesion in the duodenal bulb, reaching 70% of its lumen, with hematic residues and necrotic foci. Terlipressin was suspended and proton pump inhibitors were started. Despite intensive care, the patient developed severe encephalopathy and reentrant seizures. He eventually died 10 days after the bleeding event. CONCLUSIONS: We described a case of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to duodenal necrosis, which was caused by visceral ischemia induced by terlipressin. Given its fatality potential, this novel side effect should be remembered when using this medication in cirrhotic patients.

Clinical characteristics and treatment of terlipressin-induced ischemic skin necrosis: A synthesis of 35 literature reported cases.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The clinical features of terlipressin-induced ischemic skin necrosis are unknown. The purpose of this study is to explore the clinical features of terlipressin-induced skin necrosis. METHODS: We searched Chinese and English databases to collect case reports of terlipressin-induced skin necrosis for retrospective analysis. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 42 patients (31 males and 11 females) from 35 studies were included, with a median age of 54 years (range 0.17-84). The onset of skin ischemia ranged from a few hours to 21 days. The most common clinical manifestations were bulla (15 cases, 35.7%), cyanosis (12 cases, 28.6%), necrosis (11 cases, 26.2%), and purpura (10 cases, 23.8%). The following were often affected: the legs (26 cases), 61.9%), abdomen (13, 31.0%), scrotum (10 cases, 23.8%), feet (10 cases, 23.8%), upper extremities (8 cases, 19.0%), and hands (7 cases, 16.7%). Skin biopsy showed fibrin thrombus (7 cases, 38.9%), nonspecific inflammation (6 cases, 33.3%), and necrosis (10 cases, 55.6%). After discontinuation of terlipressin, skin symptoms improved in most patients. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Ischemic skin necrosis is a rare and serious adverse effect of terlipressin. Patients receiving terlipressin therapy should be monitored closely for terlipressin-related ischemic complications. Terlipressin should be discontinued immediately if ischemic complications occur.

Safety and efficacy of terlipressin in acute-on-chronic liver failure with hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI): a prospective cohort study.

Terlipressin with albumin, the recommended treatment for hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI), is associated with adverse events. Furthermore, the course of AKI in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is unknown. We aimed to analyze the safety and efficacy of terlipressin infusion and AKI course in patients with ACLF. We prospectively enrolled consecutive adult patients with ACLF with HRS-AKI (satisfying EASL criteria) treated with terlipressin infusion between 14 October 2019 and 24 July 2020. The objectives were to assess the incidence of adverse events, response to terlipressin, course of HRS-AKI and predictors of mortality. A total of 116 patients were included. Twenty-one percent of patients developed adverse effects. Only 1/3rd of patients who developed adverse events were alive at day 90. Sixty-five percent of the patients responded to terlipressin. Nearly 22% developed recurrence of HRS, and 5.2% progressed to HRS-chronic kidney disease. TFS was 70.4% at day 30 and 57.8% at day 90. On multivariate stepwise Cox regression analysis terlipressin non-response (hazard ratio [HR], 3.49 [1.85-6.57]; P < 0.001) and MELD NA score (HR,1.12 [1.06-1.18]; P < 0.001) predicted mortality at day-90. Patients with ACLF who develop terlipressin related adverse events have dismal prognoses. Terlipressin non-response predicts mortality in patients with ACLF and HRS-AKI.

Safety and efficacy of outpatient continuous terlipressin infusion for the treatment of portal hypertensive complications in cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Therapeutic options are limited for patients with hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), diuretic refractory ascites and hepatic hydrothorax who are awaiting liver transplant. We assessed the safety and efficacy of continuous terlipressin infusion (CTI) for treating these conditions in an outpatient setting. METHOD: All patients treated with CTI from May 2013 through March 2018 at our institution were initiated in-hospital on bolus dose terlipressin therapy for 24-72 h prior to commencing CTI for home therapy. Daily home visits for clinical assessment and medication administration were provided. Adverse events, effects of treatment on renal function, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and paracentesis/thoracentesis requirements were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were included (HRS = 17; refractory ascites = 4; refractory hepatic hydrothorax = 2). Median (range) duration of outpatient CTI was 50 (1-437) days with a total of 2482 patient days of treatment. Fourteen patients (60.9%) received a liver transplant; of whom 13 (92.9%) were alive at the end of the study period. There were no cardiac or ischemic complications and no serious adverse events reported. In patients with HRS, median serum creatinine significantly decreased from 202.0 µmol/L at baseline to 125.5 µmol/L at day 14 of CTI (P = 0.0003) and remained stable thereafter. Median MELD score decreased from 22.5 to 19.0 at end of CTI (P = 0.008). Median frequency of paracentesis/thoracentesis was 4 per month prior to CTI versus 1.52 during treatment. CONCLUSION: Transplant-eligible and otherwise stable patients can be managed with CTI at home for an extended duration under supervision without adverse consequences.

Efficacy and safety of vasopressin and terlipressin in preterm neonates: a protocol for a systematic review.

Background: The use of vasoactive agents like arginine vasopressin (AVP) and terlipressin to treat hypotension or persistent pulmonary hypertension in critically ill preterm neonates is increasing. Therefore, a systematic review of the available data on dosing, efficacy and safety of AVP and terlipressin in this patient population appears beneficial. Methods: We will conduct a systematic review of the available evidence on the use of AVP and terlipressin for the treatment of hypotension or persistent pulmonary hypertension in preterm neonates. We will search Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and Google Scholar from inception to March 2021. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, review the full text of eligible studies, extract data, assess the risk of bias and judge the certainty of the evidence. Our primary outcome will be an (1) improvement of end-organ perfusion after initiation of AVP or terlipressin and (2) mortality prior to discharge. Our secondary outcomes will include (1) major neurosensory abnormality and (2) the occurrence of adverse events. Discussion: The currently available evidence on the efficacy and safety of AVP and terlipressin in preterm neonates is limited. Yet, evidence on the pharmacology of these drugs and the pathophysiology of vasoplegic shock support the biological plausibility for their clinical effectiveness in this population. Therefore, we aim to address this gap concerning the use of vasopressin and terlipressin among critically ill preterm neonates. Trial registration: This protocol has been submitted for registration to the international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews (PROSPERO, awaiting registration number).

Ischemic skin necrosis secondary to the use of terlipressin.

We present the case of a 45-year-old male with alcoholic liver cirrhosis Child-Pugh C and chronic left lower limb lymphedema, hospitalized because of ascites and renal impairment (Cr 2.33 mg/dl). He received intravenous albumin and terlipressin (1 mg every 4h) for suspected hepatorenal syndrome. After 48 hours, purpuric skin lesions appeared on both lower extremities, scrotum and umbilical hernia. Renal function improved (Cr 0.49 mg/dl). Nevertheless, terlipressin was discontinued as the skin lesions worsened due to epidermal detachment, and oral sildenafil was administered at 50 mg twice per day. The left lower limb was severely affected with extensive skin and soft tissue necrosis, which led to supracondylar amputation. All the other lesions had a satisfactory evolution, with reepithelialization of the damaged areas.

Terlipressin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hepatorenal syndrome is a fatal complication of advanced cirrhosis. Terlipressin is the most widely used treatment method, however, the therapy effects remain inconsonant. We aim to systematically assess the safety and efficacy of terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Randomized controlled trials involving terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome were included in a systematic literature search. Two authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion and extracted the data. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the safety and efficacy of terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome. RESULTS: A total of 18 randomized controlled trials including 1011 patients were included. Hepatorenal syndrome reverse rate was 42.0% in the terlipressin group and 26.2% in the non-terlipressin group. Terlipressin had greater hepatorenal syndrome reverse rate and renal function improvement rate than placebo and octreotide in the management of HRS. Comparing to norepinephrine, terlipressin had similar efficacy, but with more adverse events. No significant difference of the efficacy was found between terlipressin and dopamine treatment. The subgroup analysis for type 1 HRS had the above same results, except that the adverse events were not significant different between norepinephrine group and terlipressin group. CONCLUSIONS: Terlipressin was superior to placebo and octreotide for reversal of hepatorenal syndrome and improving renal function, but it had no superiority comparing to norepinephrine.

Hepatorenal syndrome: the clinical impact of vasoactive therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a unique form of acute kidney injury seen in cirrhotic patients and associated with significant mortality and morbidity. Despite its impact, diagnosis and treatment of HRS remains challenging and this review aims to assess and compare the available vasoconstrictors used as first-line treatment for HRS. Areas covered: A literature review was undertaken on the use of vasoconstrictors in HRS, using PubMed/Medline database searches of: 'hepatorenal syndrome', 'HRS' and 'vasoconstrictor'. Expert commentary: Current diagnosis criteria are based on an exclusion-based approach using serum creatinine as a biomarker. However, this method relies on the measurement over a sustained period of time resulting in delayed treatment. Using urine biomarkers, the revised acute kidney injury guidelines and novel plasma expanders may improve diagnosis and the implementation of time-sensitive management of HRS. Vasoconstrictors are the first-line treatment for HRS, in which terlipressin is the vasoconstrictor of choice supported by current guidelines and a substantial clinical evidence base over other vasoconstrictors, such as noradrenaline or midodrine plus octreotide. Future developments in dosage and administrative techniques for terlipressin may have an important role to play in maintaining clinical efficacy whilst improving tolerability in the management of HRS.

Terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs for hepatorenal syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Hepatorenal syndrome is defined as severe renal failure occurring in people with cirrhosis and ascites. Systematic reviews of randomised clinical trials found that, compared with placebo, terlipressin may reduce mortality and improve renal function in people with hepatorenal syndrome, but we need current evidence from systematic reviews on the benefits and harms of terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of terlipressin versus other vasoactive drugs for people with hepatorenal syndrome. SEARCH METHODS: We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index Expanded; conducted manual searches of references in relevant literature; and wrote to experts and pharmaceutical companies (date of last search November 2016). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials comparing terlipressin versus any other type of vasoactive drugs for hepatorenal syndrome. We allowed albumin and other cointerventions if provided equally in the comparison groups. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three authors independently extracted data. The primary outcomes were mortality, hepatorenal syndrome (persistent hepatorenal syndrome despite treatment), and serious adverse events. We conducted meta-analyses and present the results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We performed sensitivity, subgroup, and Trial Sequential Analyses and evaluated bias control based on the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group domains. MAIN RESULTS: We included 10 randomised clinical trials with 474 participants. The trials compared terlipressin versus noradrenaline (seven trials), octreotide (one trial), midodrine and octreotide (one trial), or dopamine (one trial). All participants in both groups received albumin as cointervention. We classified two trials at low risk of bias and eight trials at high risk of bias in the assessment of mortality and all trials at high risk of bias for remaining outcomes. In five trials, investigators specifically stated that they did not receive funding from for-profit organisations. We had no information about the funding source from the remaining five trials.Terlipressin was not superior or inferior compared with other vasoactive drugs in regard to mortality when including the two trials with a low risk of bias (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.36; 94 participants, very low quality evidence) or when including all 10 trials (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06; 474 participants; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence). One meta-analysis including nine trials suggested a beneficial effect of terlipressin on hepatorenal syndrome (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99; 394 participants; I² = 26%; very low quality evidence). Due to the high mortality of hepatorenal syndrome, the registration of other serious adverse events is uncertain, but comparing terlipressin and other vasoactive drugs we found no significant difference (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.06; 474 participants; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence). Several trials did not report systematically of adverse events, but terlipressin seemed to increase the risks of diarrhoea or abdominal pain, or both (RR 3.50, 95% CI 1.19 to 10.27; 221 participants; 5 trials, I² = 0%). However, Trial Sequential Analyses found insufficient evidence to support or refute any differences between interventions for all outcomes. Considering reversal of hepatorenal syndrome, subgroup analyses on the type of other vasoactive drugs found that terlipressin was superior compared with midodrine and octreotide (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.72) or octreotide alone (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.96), but each subgroup only included one small trial. None of the remaining subgroup or sensitivity analyses found differences between terlipressin and other vasoactive drugs. We downgraded the evidence to very low quality because of the high risk of bias, imprecision, and the results of the Trial Sequential Analyses. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found insufficient evidence to support or refute beneficial or harmful effects of terlipressin and albumin versus other vasoactive drugs and albumin. Additional research is needed to evaluate if clinically meaningful differences exist between interventions.