La noradrenalina como tratamiento médico alternativo a la terlipresina en el manejo del síndrome hepatorrenal tipo 1 / Noradrenaline as an alternative medical treatment to terlipressin in the management of hepatorenal syndrome type 1

No disponible

Noradrenaline is as Effective as Terlipressin in Hepatorenal Syndrome Type 1: A Prospective, Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a functional renal failure occurring in end stage liver disease, which is associated with poor prognosis. Terlipressin has been shown to be effective in treatment of HRS. More recently, it was suggested that noradrenaline, an alpha-adrenergic drug may be also effective in HRS. We aimed to compare the efficacy of noradrenaline versus terlipressin in treatment of HRS type 1. METHODS: Consecutive patients with cirrhosis and HRS type 1 were enrolled and randomised into 2 groups- Group A received intravenous noradrenaline infusion (0.5-3 mg/h) and group B received intravenous terlipressin (0.5-2 mg/6h) for 2 weeks. Intravenous albumin (20 g/day) was given to both groups. RESULTS: Out of 55 cirrhotics screened, 41 were randomised into group A (n=21) or group B (n=20). Baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. HRS reversal was seen in 47.6%(10/21) patients in group A, and 45% (9/20) patients in group B (p=1.00). In both groups, there was a significant decrease in serum creatinine from baseline (group A- 3.1±1.4 mg/dl to 2.2±1.3 mg/dl, p=0.028; group B- 3.4±1.6 mg/dl to 2.3±1.3 mg/dl, p=0.035). Both the groups showed a significant increase in mean arterial pressure (group A- 77.3±8.6 mmHg to 103.4±8.3 mmHg, p=0.0001; group B- 76.8±11.6 mmHg to 100±9.4 mmHg, p=0.0001). Noradrenaline was associated with fewer adverse events and was significantly cheaper than terlipressin. Lower baseline MELD score was an independent predictor of response to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Noradrenaline is as effective and safe as terlipressin in the treatment of HRS type 1.

TERLIPRESSIN VERSUS NORADRENALINE FOR HEPATORENAL SYNDROME. Economic evaluation under the perspective of the Brazilian Public Health System.

BACKGROUND: - Terlipressin and noradrenaline are the best studied treatments for hepatorenal syndrome, and there is no evidence of superiority of one over the other regarding to efficacy. While the former drug is more costly, the latter requires admission into an intensive care unit. OBJECTIVE: - The aim of this study was to perform an economic evaluation, comparing treatments for hepatorenal syndrome with terlipressin and noradrenaline. METHODS: - For the economic evaluation, a cost-minimization analysis was performed. Direct medical costs of the two treatment strategies were compared under the perspective of the Brazilian Public Health System as the third-party payer. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: - The costs of treatments with terlipressin or noradrenaline were 287.77 and 2,960.45 International Dollars (Int$) respectively. Treatment using terlipressin would save Int$2,672.68 for the Public Health System for each hospital admission related to hepatorenal syndrome. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, it was verified that the cost of the treatment with noradrenaline could vary between Int$2,326.53 and Int$3,644.16, while costs related to the treatment using terlipressin are not variable. CONCLUSION: - The treatment strategy using terlipressin was more economical than that using noradrenaline under the perspective of the Brazilian Public Health System as the third-party payer.

Terlipressin versus noradrenaline in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: systematic review with meta-analysis and full economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and costs of terlipressin and noradrenaline for the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome from the perspective of the Brazilian public health system and that of a major private health insurance. METHODS: Comparison of efficacy was performed through a systematic review with a meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials using a random-effects model. Economic evaluation was carried out through cost minimization. RESULTS: Four studies (154 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. There was no evidence of a difference between treatments with terlipressin or noradrenaline in terms of 30-day survival (risk ratio=1.04, 95% confidence interval=0.84-1.30, P=0.70). From the perspective of the public health system, costs of the treatments with terlipressin or noradrenaline were Int$7437.04 and Int$8406.41, respectively. From the perspective of the private health insurance, costs of treatments with terlipressin and noradrenaline were Int$13,484.57 and Int$15,061.01, respectively. CONCLUSION: There was no evidence of superiority between treatment strategies using terlipressin or noradrenaline in terms of the survival of patients with hepatorenal syndrome, but the strategy using terlipressin was more economical under two different perspectives.

Noradrenaline or terlipressin for hepatorenal syndrome?

Hepatorenal syndrome is a condition associated with very high mortality that may be reverted in some cases with vasoconstrictors. Terlipressin has generally been considered standard treatment, but noradrenaline has been postulated as alternative. Searching in Epistemonikos database, which is maintained by screening 30 databases, we identified six systematic reviews including four pertinent randomized controlled trials. We combined the evidence using meta-analysis and generated a summary of findings following the GRADE approach. We concluded noradrenaline and terlipressin probably have similar effects on reverting hepatorrenal syndrome and decreasing mortality, but noradrenaline is associated with less adverse effects, and has lower costs.

El síndrome hepatorrenal es una condición asociada a altísima mortalidad, que puede ser recuperada en ciertos casos con el uso de vasoconstrictores. Generalmente se considera que terlipresina es el tratamiento estándar, pero noradrenalina se ha planteado como una alternativa. Utilizando la base de datos Epistemonikos, la cual es mantenida mediante búsquedas en 30 bases de datos, identificamos seis revisiones sistemáticas que en conjunto incluyen cuatro estudios aleatorizados. Realizamos un metanálisis y tablas de resumen de los resultados utilizando el método GRADE. Concluimos que noradrenalina y terlipresina son probablemente igual de efectivas en lograr mejoría del síndrome hepatorrenal y disminuir la mortalidad, pero que noradrenalina se asocia a menos efectos adversos, y tiene un menor costo.

An economic evaluation of vasoactive agents used in the United Kingdom for acute bleeding oesophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct an economic evaluation of terlipressin, octreotide and placebo in the treatment of bleeding oesophageal varices (BOV) where endotherapy could be used concomitantly. METHODS: A discrete event simulation model was created with transition states: bleeding, no bleeding, no bleeding post transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, post-salvage surgery, and death. Efficacy data on survival, re-bleeding and control of bleeding were obtained from high quality studies reported in Cochrane meta-analyses. Baseline outcomes related to the course of disease and health-state utilities were derived from published sources. Vasoactive treatment costs and all related BOV costs were obtained from published UK sources. RESULTS: The average aggregated treatment cost per person for all medical interventions at 1 year was lower for terlipressin-treated patients (2623 pounds sterling) compared with those treated using octreotide (2758 pounds sterling) or placebo (2890 pounds sterling). The incremental analysis comparing terlipressin with octreotide and placebo using a cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) and cost per life year gained (LYG) approach indicated that terlipressin was the dominant BOV treatment option (i.e. it cost less and it was more effective). Based on a maximum willingness to pay of 20,000 pounds sterling/QALY terlipressin was more effective and cost-saving compared to octreotide and placebo for simulations ranging from 42 days to 2 years. In point estimation analyses octreotide was dominant compared to placebo; however, probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that octreotide was unlikely to be cost-effective compared to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that vasoactive treatment in BOV was cost-saving compared to no vasoactive treatment. Furthermore, terlipressin was the more cost-effective vasoactive treatment for BOV in cirrhotic patients.

Noradrenalin vs terlipressin in patients with hepatorenal syndrome: a prospective, randomized, unblinded, pilot study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Treatment of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is based on vasoconstrictors. Terlipressin is the one with the soundest evidence. Noradrenalin has been suggested as an effective alternative. The current study was aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of noradrenalin vs terlipressin in patients with HRS. METHODS: Twenty-two consecutive cirrhotic patients with HRS (9 with HRS type 1; 13 with HRS type 2) were included. Patients were randomly assigned to be treated with noradrenalin (0.1-0.7 microg/kg/min) and albumin (10 patients) or with terlipressin (1-2 mg/4h) and albumin (12 patients). Treatment was administered until HRS reversal or for a maximum of two weeks. Patients were followed-up until liver transplantation or death. RESULTS: Reversal of HRS was observed in 7 of the 10 patients (70%) treated with noradrenalin and in 10 of the 12 patients (83%) treated with terlipressin, p=ns. Treatment led in both groups to a significant improvement in renal and circulatory function. No patient developed signs of myocardial ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this unblinded, pilot study suggest that noradrenalin is as effective and safe as terlipressin in patients with HRS. These results would support the use of noradrenalin, a cheap and widely available drug, in the management of these patients.

Treating bleeding oesophageal varices with vasoactive agents: good value for money?

This article provides an editorial commentary to accompany the publication of an article on the economic evaluation of vasoactive agents used in the United Kingdom for acute bleeding oesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis by Wechowski et al. From a clinical standpoint, the successful management of bleeding oesophageal varices should be based on definitive treatments such as therapeutic endoscopy or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPSS). Vasoactive agents such as terlipressin can be useful and potentially cost-effective additional therapy, however, particularly in patients where endoscopic treatment is likely to be delayed or is contraindicated.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the terlipressin-glycerin trinitrate combination in the pre-hospital management of acute gastro-intestinal haemorrhage in cirrhotic patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of an early treatment of upper gastro-intestinal haemorrages in cirrhotic patients. DESIGN: Utilization data linked to the results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial demonstrating the efficacy of the terlipressin-glycerin trinitrate combination (TER-GTN) in the reduction of mortality at day 42 for haemorragic patients due to rupture of oesophageal varices. SETTING: Hôpital Jean Verdier, Bondy, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, France. SUBJECTS: Eighty-four patients included over 2 years by emergency services and hospitalized in an intensive care unit (ICU) for haemorrage, 41 in the "treated" group and 43 in the "placebo" group. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality at day 42, cost per death avoided. RESULTS: The mortality rate in the placebo group was 46.5% versus 27.5% in the treated group. The mean length of stay was 5 days longer in the treatment group. The excess cost per death avoided was 25,849 FF. Of this extra cost 27% was due to treatment and 24% was due to increased length of stay. The excess cost per case treated was FF 5,097, 10% of the total cost per stay for rupture of oesophageal varices (ROV). CONCLUSIONS: Our results are of the same magnitude as those published by Mac Cormick et al. in the United Kingdom for similar treatment. The extra cost appears to be moderate, and much lower than monoclonal antibody therapy for sepsis. The impact on the study hospital budget did not exceed 1.7 10(-4).

Octreotide versus terlypressin in acute variceal hemorrhage in liver cirrhosis. Emergency control and prevention of early rebleeding.

Sixty patients with endoscopically confirmed active variceal bleeding entered a randomized controlled clinical trial aimed at comparing the efficacy of octreotide vs. terlypressin in the control of acute variceal hemorrhage (period I, 24 h) and in the prevention of early rebleeding (period II, 6 days). Of the sixty 30 received octreotide (period I, 100 micrograms bolus followed by continuous intravenous infusion at 25 micrograms/h; period II, 100 micrograms t.i.d. subcutaneously), and 30 received terlypressin (period I, 2 mg intravenous bolus every 4 h; period II, 2nd day, 2 mg every 6 h; from 3th to 7th days, 1 mg every 6 h). Control of bleeding was achieved in 23 (76.6%) patients receiving octreotide and in 16 (53%) treated with terlypressin (NS); none of these patients suffered rebleeding during treatment. No significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups during the hospitalization period. Complications due to therapy were lower with octreotide than with terlypressin (P < 0.01). Under the same effectiveness conditions the cost/benefit ratio must be taken into account.