Carmen Vinaixa

Impact of anticoagulation on upper-gastrointestinal bleeding in cirrhosis. A retrospective multicenter study.

Recent studies have shown that liver cirrhosis (LC) behaves as an acquired hypercoagulable state with increased thrombotic risk. This is why anticoagulation therapy (AT) is now frequently used in these patients. Variceal bleeding is a severe complication of LC. It is unknown whether AT may impact the outcome of bleeding in these patients. Fifty‐two patients on AT with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) were evaluated. Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and different cardiovascular disorders (CVDs) were the indication for AT in 14 and 38 patients, respectively. Overall, 104 patients with LC and UGIB not under AT matched for severity of LC, age, sex, source of bleeding, and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score served as controls. UGIB was attributed to portal hypertension (PH) in 99 (63%) patients and peptic/vascular lesions in 57 (37%). Twenty‐six (17%) patients experienced 5‐day failure; SOFA, source of UGIB, and PVT, but not AT, were independent predictors of 5‐day failure. In addition, independent predictors of 6‐week mortality, which was observed in 26 (11%) patients, were SOFA, Charlson Comorbidity index, and use of AT for a CVD. There were no differences between patients with/without AT in needs for rescue therapies, intensive care unit admission, transfusions, and hospital stay. Conclusions: Factors that impact the outcome of UGIB in patients under AT are degree of multiorgan failure and comorbidity, but not AT itself. (Hepatology 2015;62:575–583

Clinical outcomes of patients undergoing antiviral therapy while awaiting liver transplantation

BACKGROUND & AIMS Antiviral therapy for the treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) infection has proved to be safe and efficacious in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT). However, the information regarding the clinical impact of viral eradication in patients on the waiting list is still limited. The aim of the study was to investigate the probability of delisting in patients who underwent antiviral therapy, and the clinical outcomes of these delisted patients. METHODS Observational, multicenter and retrospective analysis was carried out on prospectively collected data from patients positive for HCV, treated with an interferon-free regimen, while awaiting LT in 18 hospitals in Spain. RESULTS In total, 238 patients were enrolled in the study. The indication for LT was decompensated cirrhosis (with or without hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]) in 171 (72%) patients, and HCC in 67 (28%) patients. Sustained virologic response (SVR) rate was significantly higher in patients with compensated cirrhosis and HCC (92% vs. 83% in patients with decompensated cirrhosis with or without HCC, p=0.042). Among 122 patients with decompensated cirrhosis without HCC, 29 (24%) were delisted due to improvement. No patient with baseline MELD score >20 was delisted. After delisting (median follow-up of 88weeks), three patients had clinical decompensations and three had de novo HCC. Only two of the patients with HCC had to be re-admitted onto the waiting list. The remaining 23 patients remained stable, with no indication for LT. CONCLUSIONS Antiviral therapy is safe and efficacious in patients awaiting LT. A quarter of patients with decompensated cirrhosis can be delisted asa result of clinical improvement, which appears to be remain stable in most patients. Thus, delisting is a safe strategy that could spare organs and benefit other patients with a more urgent need. LAY SUMMARY Antiviral therapy in patients awaiting liver transplantation is safe and efficacious. Viral eradication allows removal from the waiting list of a quarter of treated patients. Delisting because of clinical improvement is a safe strategy that can spare organs for patients in urgent need.

Improved renal function in liver transplant recipients treated for hepatitis C virus with a sustained virological response and mild chronic kidney disease

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is associated with renal complications. We aimed to determine whether a sustained virological response (SVR) was associated with improvements in renal function (RF) in liver transplant (LT) recipients treated for HCV. Changes in RF were compared 1, 3, and 5 years after therapy as a function of the stage of chronic kidney disease (CKD) before treatment (BT). Variables associated with renal dysfunction [RD; 4‐variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD‐4) value 60 mL/minute] at the last follow‐up (LFU) were evaluated for all treated LT patients with a minimum follow‐up of at least 1 year since the end of treatment (EOT; n = 175). There were 99 patients with stage 2 CKD BT (MDRD‐4 value 60‐89 mL/minute/1.73 m2), and an improvement in RF was observed more frequently among SVR patients versus nonresponders (NRs). The median changes in the MDRD‐4 values BT to 1, 3, and 5 years after treatment were −0.5, 4.5, and 9.4 mL/minute for the SVR patients and −1, −0.3, and −1.5 mL/minute for the NRs (P = 0.61, P = 0.06, and P = 0.004, respectively). RD was present in 31% of the patients at the LFU at a median of 3.8 years after EOT (range 1‐9 years). The follow‐up did not differ between SVR patients and NRs. RD was present at the LFU in 19% of SVR patients versus 40% of NRs (P = 0.002). In the multivariate analysis, RD at the LFU was associated with NRs [relative risk (RR) 3.8, 95% confidence interval (CI)  = 1.3‐11.23, P = 0.01], EOT MDRD‐4 values (RR = 1.022, 95% CI = 1.001‐1.04, P = 0.04), and female sex (RR = 5.6, 95% CI = 1.84‐17.5, P = 0.002). In conclusion, SVR leads to improved RF in HCV‐infected LT recipients with stage 2 CKD BT. Liver Transpl 20:25–34, 2014.

Use of artificial intelligence as an innovative donor-recipient matching model for liver transplantation: Results from a multicenter Spanish study

BACKGROUND & AIMS There is an increasing discrepancy between the number of potential liver graft recipients and the number of organs available. Organ allocation should follow the concept of benefit of survival, avoiding human-innate subjectivity. The aim of this study is to use artificial-neural-networks (ANNs) for donor-recipient (D-R) matching in liver transplantation (LT) and to compare its accuracy with validated scores (MELD, D-MELD, DRI, P-SOFT, SOFT, and BAR) of graft survival. METHODS 64 donor and recipient variables from a set of 1003 LTs from a multicenter study including 11 Spanish centres were included. For each D-R pair, common statistics (simple and multiple regression models) and ANN formulae for two non-complementary probability-models of 3-month graft-survival and -loss were calculated: a positive-survival (NN-CCR) and a negative-loss (NN-MS) model. The NN models were obtained by using the Neural Net Evolutionary Programming (NNEP) algorithm. Additionally, receiver-operating-curves (ROC) were performed to validate ANNs against other scores. RESULTS Optimal results for NN-CCR and NN-MS models were obtained, with the best performance in predicting the probability of graft-survival (90.79%) and -loss (71.42%) for each D-R pair, significantly improving results from multiple regressions. ROC curves for 3-months graft-survival and -loss predictions were significantly more accurate for ANN than for other scores in both NN-CCR (AUROC-ANN=0.80 vs. -MELD=0.50; -D-MELD=0.54; -P-SOFT=0.54; -SOFT=0.55; -BAR=0.67 and -DRI=0.42) and NN-MS (AUROC-ANN=0.82 vs. -MELD=0.41; -D-MELD=0.47; -P-SOFT=0.43; -SOFT=0.57, -BAR=0.61 and -DRI=0.48). CONCLUSIONS ANNs may be considered a powerful decision-making technology for this dataset, optimizing the principles of justice, efficiency and equity. This may be a useful tool for predicting the 3-month outcome and a potential research area for future D-R matching models.

Framingham score, renal dysfunction, and cardiovascular risk in liver transplant patients

Cardiovascular (CV) events represent major impediments to the long‐term survival of liver transplantation (LT) patients. The aim of this study was to assess whether the Framingham risk score (FRS) at transplantation can predict the development of post‐LT cardiovascular events (CVEs). Patients transplanted between 2006 and 2008 were included. Baseline features, CV risk factors, and CVEs occurring after LT (ischemic heart disease, stroke, heart failure, de novo arrhythmias, and peripheral arterial disease) were recorded. In total, 250 patients (69.6% men) with a median age of 56 years (range, 18‐68 years) were included. At transplantation, 34.4%, 34.4%, and 33.2% of patients, respectively, had a low, moderate, and high FRS with a median FRS of 14.9 (range, 0.09‐30); 14.4% of LT recipients developed at least 1 CVE at a median of 2.619 years (range, 0.006‐6.945 years). In the univariate analysis, factors associated with the development of CVEs were the continuous FRS at LT (P = 0.003), age (P = 0.007), creatinine clearance [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR); P = 0.020], and mycophenolate mofetil use at discharge (P = 0.011). In the multivariate analysis, only the eGFR [hazard ratio (HR), 0.98; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.97‐1.00; P = 0.009] and FRS (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02‐1.10; P = 0.002) remained in the model. Moreover, an association was also found between the FRS and overall survival (P = 0.004) with 5‐year survival rates of 82.5%, 77.8%, and 61.4% for the low‐, moderate‐, and high‐risk groups, respectively. Continuous FRS, eGFR, and hepatitis C virus infection were independent risk factors for overall mortality. In our series, the FRS and eGFR at LT were able to predict the development of post‐LT CVEs and poor outcomes. Liver Transpl 21:812‐822, 2015.

Predictive factors for survival and score application in liver retransplantation for hepatitis C recurrence

AIM To identify risk factors associated with survival in patients retransplanted for hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence and to apply a survival score to this population. METHODS We retrospectively identified 108 patients retransplanted for HCV recurrence in eight European liver transplantation centers (seven in France, one in Spain). Data collection comprised clinical and laboratory variables, including virological and antiviral treatment data. We then analyzed the factors associated with survival in this population. A recently published score that predicts survival in retransplantation in patients with hepatitis C was applied. Because there are currently no uniform recommendations regarding selection of the best candidates for retransplantation in this setting, we also described the clinical characteristics of 164 patients not retransplanted, with F3, F4, or fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis (FCH) post-first graft presenting with hepatic decompensation. RESULTS Overall retransplantation patient survival rates were 55%, 47%, and 43% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Patients who were retransplanted for advanced cirrhosis had survival rates of 59%, 52%, and 49% at 3, 5, and 10 years, while those retransplanted for FCH had survival rates of 34%, 29%, and 11%, respectively. Under multivariate analysis, and adjusting for the center effect and the occurrence of FCH, factors associated with better survival after retransplantation were: negative HCV viremia before retransplantation, antiviral therapy after retransplantation, non-genotype 1, a Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score < 25 when replaced on the waiting list, and a retransplantation donor age < 60 years. Although the numbers were small, in the context of the new antivirals era, we showed that outcomes in patients who underwent retransplantation with undetectable HCV viremia did not depend on donor age and MELD score. The Andrés score was applied to 102 patients for whom all score variables were available, producing a mean score of 43.4 (SD = 6.6). Survival rates after the date of the first decompensation post-first liver transplantation (LT1) in the liver retransplantation (reLT) group (94 patients decompensated) at 3, 5, and 10 years were 62%, 59%, and 51%, respectively, among 78 retransplanted individuals with advanced cirrhosis, and 42%, 32%, and 16% among 16 retransplanted individuals with FCH. In the non-reLT group with hepatic decompensation, survival rates were 27%, 18%, and 9% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively (P < 0.0001). Compared with non-retransplanted patients, retransplanted patients were younger at LT1 (mean age 48 ± 8 years compared to 53 ± 9 years in the no reLT group, P < 0.0001), less likely to have human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) co-infection (4% vs 14% among no reLT patients, P = 0.005), more likely to have received corticosteroid bolus therapy after LT1 (25% in reLT vs 12% in the no reLT group, P = 0.01), and more likely to have presented with sustained virological response (SVR) after the first transplantation (20% in the reLT group vs 7% in the no reLT group, P = 0.028). CONCLUSION Antiviral therapy before and after retransplantation had a substantial impact on survival in the context of retransplantation for HCV recurrence, and with the new direct-acting antivirals now available, outcomes should be even better in the future.

DISEASE REVERSIBILITY IN PATIENTS WITH POSTHEPATITIS C CIRRHOSIS: IS THE POINT OF NO RETURN THE SAME BEFORE AND AFTER LIVER TRANSPLANTATION? A REVIEW.

Abstract Liver fibrosis can regress in patients with chronic hepatitis in whom the underlying cause of liver damage is adequately treated. Studies documenting this benefit have been mostly performed in the setting of viral hepatitis, particularly hepatitis C virus, where sustained viral response has been unequivocally shown to result in histological and clinical improvement. With the advent of the new IFN-free regimens, highly effective and safe even in those historically considered “difficult to treat and cure patients,” additional benefits have been documented in patients treated at advanced stages of disease, including improvement in liver function with hepatic “recompensation,” reduction of portal hypertension, and eventually avoidance of liver transplantation. Disease reversibility has been also demonstrated in the posttransplant setting and appears to be similar to what is observed in the nontransplant patient.

Impact of hepatitis C virus (HCV) antiviral treatment on the need for liver transplantation (LT)

Therapies for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection have revolutionized the treatment of patients with chronic HCV infection. The effect of these therapies on the epidemiology of liver transplantation (LT) has yet to be elucidated.

Avances en el tratamiento de la hepatitis C

Recent approval of new protease inhibitors (boceprevir and telaprevir) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C, genotype 1, has meant a significant increase in the sustained viral response both in naive and previously treated patients. However, such efficacy increase has been accompanied by an increase in adverse events, sometimes serious, and new practical issues including different approaches to stop treatment and drug interactions that recommend a close follow-up of patients. The efficacy and safety of triple therapy in special populations such as cirrhotic and transplanted patients is less known and has some particulars, meaning that its administration requires an exhaustive monitoring.

Efficacy and safety of daclatasvir-based antiviral therapy in HCV recurrence after liver transplantation. Role of cirrhosis and genotype 3. A multi-centre cohort study

Direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAA) combining daclatasvir (DCV) have reported good outcomes in the recurrence of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after liver transplant (LT). However, its effect on the severe recurrence and the risk of death remains controversial. We evaluated the efficacy, predictors of survival, and safety of DAC‐based regimens in a large real‐world cohort. A total of 331 patients received DCV‐based therapy. Duration of therapy and ribavirin use were at the investigators discretion. The primary end point was sustained virological response (SVR) at week 12. A multivariate analysis of predictive factors of mortality was performed. Intention‐to‐treat (ITT) and per‐protocol SVR were 93.05% and 96.9%. ITT‐SVR was lower in cirrhosis (n = 163) (96.4% vs. 89.6% P = 0.017); the SVR in genotype 3 (n = 91) was similar, even in advanced fibrosis (96.7% vs. 88%, P = 0.2). Ten patients (3%) experienced virological failure. Therapy was stopped in 18 patients (5.44%), and ten died during treatment. A total of 22 patients (6.6%) died. Albumin (HR = 0.376; 95% CI 0.155–0.910) and baseline MELD (HR = 1.137; 95% CI: 1.061–1.218) were predictors of death. DCV‐based DAA treatment is efficacious and safe in patients with HCV infection after LT. Baseline MELD score and serum albumin are predictors of survival irrespective of viral response.