Norman D. Grace

Prevention and management of gastroesophageal varices and variceal hemorrhage in cirrhosis

Prevention and Management of Gastroesophageal Varices and Variceal Hemorrhage in Cirrhosis Guadalupe Garcia-Tsao, M.D.,1 Arun J. Sanyal, M.D.,2 Norman D. Grace, M.D., FACG,3 William D. Carey, M.D., MACG,4 the Practice Guidelines Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases and the Practice Parameters Committee of the American College of Gastroenterology 1Section of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine and VA-CT Healthcare System, New Haven, Connecticut; 2Division of Gastroenterology, Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia; 3Division of Gastroenterology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts; 4The Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

Hemodynamic Events in a Prospective Randomized Trial of Propranolol Versus Placebo in the Prevention of a First Variceal Hemorrhage

In a double-blind randomized trial, the hemodynamic events following the administration of propranolol (n = 51) or a placebo (n = 51) were prospectively studied in cirrhotic patients with esophageal varices. The hepatic venous pressure gradient, heart rate, and variceal size were determined at the baseline and 3, 12, and 24 months after the beginning of therapy. Baseline values were similar in both groups. At 3 months, the hepatic venous pressure gradient decreased significantly in propranolol-treated patients (from 18.1 +/- 4.2 to 15.7 +/- 3.4 mm Hg; P less than 0.05) but not in patients receiving the placebo (19.6 +/- 6.8 to 17.5 +/- 5.3 mm Hg; NS). At subsequent time intervals this gradient decreased significantly from the baseline value in both groups. Heart rate decreased significantly in the propranolol-treated group at all times (P less than 0.001). Variceal hemorrhage occurred in 13 patients (11 placebo-, 2 propranolol-treated; P less than 0.01), all of whom had a hepatic venous pressure gradient greater than 12 mm Hg. In 21 patients (14 propranolol-, 7 placebo-treated) the hepatic venous pressure gradient decreased to less than or equal to 12 mm Hg; none of them bled from esophageal varices, and their mortality rate also decreased. Because most of the bleeding events occurred during the first year (10 placebo-, 1 propranolol-treated; P less than 0.01), propranolol seems to have its protective effect during the period associated with the largest reduction in the hepatic venous pressure gradient. Because a reduction in the hepatic venous pressure gradient to less than 12 mm Hg protects from variceal bleeding and increases the rate of survival, this should be the aim of the pharmacological therapy of portal hypertension.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient predicts development of hepatocellular carcinoma independently of severity of cirrhosis

BACKGROUND/AIMS A total of 213 patients with compensated cirrhosis, portal hypertension and no varices were included in a trial evaluating beta-blockers in preventing varices. Predictors of the development of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) were analyzed. METHODS Baseline laboratory tests, ultrasound and HVPG measurements were performed. Patients were followed prospectively every three months until development of varices or variceal bleeding or end of the study in 09/02. The endpoint was HCC development according to standard diagnostic criteria. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were developed to identify predictors of HCC. RESULTS In a median follow-up of 58 months 26/213 (12.2%) patients developed HCC. Eight patients were transplanted and 28 patients died without HCC. Twenty-one (84%) HCC developed in patients with HCV. On multivariate analysis HVPG (HR 1.18; 95%CI 1.08-1.29), albumin (HR 0.34; 95%CI 0.14-0.83) and viral etiology (HR 4.59; 95%CI 1.51-13.92) were independent predictors of HCC development. ROC curves identified 10 mmHg of HVPG as the best cut-off; those who had an HVPG above this value had a 6-fold increase in the HCC incidence. CONCLUSIONS Portal hypertension is an independent predictor of HCC development. An HVPG >10 mmHg is associated with a 6-fold increase of HCC risk.

Assessment of therapeutic benefit of antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis C: is hepatic venous pressure gradient a better end point?

Chronic hepatitis C is a major healthcare problem. The response to antiviral therapy for patients with chronic hepatitis C has previously been defined biochemically and by PCR. However, changes in the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) may be considered as an adjunctive end point for the therapeutic evaluation of antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis C. It is a validated technique which is safe, well tolerated, well established, and reproducible. Serial HVPG measurements may be the best way to evaluate response to therapy in chronic hepatitis C.

Incidence, Prevalence, and Clinical Significance of Abnormal Hematologic Indices in Compensated Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS Patients with cirrhosis develop abnormal hematologic indices (HI) from multiple factors, including hypersplenism. We aimed to analyze the sequence of events and determine whether abnormal HI has prognostic significance. METHODS We analyzed a database of 213 subjects with compensated cirrhosis without esophageal varices. Subjects were followed for approximately 9 years until the development of varices or variceal bleeding or completion of the study; 84 subjects developed varices. Abnormal HI was defined as anemia at baseline (hemoglobin, < or =13.5 g/dL for men and 11.5 g/dL for women), leukopenia (white blood cell counts, < or =4000/mm3), or thrombocytopenia (platelet counts, < or =150,000/mm3). The primary end points were death or transplant surgery. RESULTS Most subjects had thrombocytopenia at baseline. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that leukopenia occurred by 30 months (95% confidence interval, 18.5-53.6), and anemia occurred by 39.6 months (95% confidence interval, 24.1-49.9). Baseline thrombocytopenia (P = .0191) and leukopenia (P = .0383) were predictors of death or transplant, after adjusting for baseline hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), and Child-Pugh scores. After a median of 5 years, a significant difference in death or transplant, mortality, and clinical decompensation was observed in patients who had leukopenia combined with thrombocytopenia at baseline compared with patients with normal HI (P < .0001). HVPG correlated with hemoglobin and white blood cell count (hemoglobin, r = -0.35, P < .0001; white blood cell count, r = -0.31, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS Thrombocytopenia is the most common and first abnormal HI to occur in patients with cirrhosis, followed by leukopenia and anemia. A combination of leukopenia and thrombocytopenia at baseline predicted increased morbidity and mortality.

Obesity is an independent risk factor for clinical decompensation in patients with cirrhosis

Obesity is associated with an aggressive course in chronic viral hepatitis; however, its impact in the development of clinical decompensation (CD) in patients with established cirrhosis is uncertain. We evaluated the role of obesity, in relationship to other recognized predictors, in the development of CD in patients with compensated cirrhosis. The study population, a subset of patients included in a randomized trial of beta‐blockers in the prevention of varices in whom data on body mass index (BMI) was available, consisted of 161 patients with compensated cirrhosis. Laboratory tests and portal pressure (assessed by the hepatic venous pressure gradient or HVPG) were assessed on inclusion. Patients were followed until CD (ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, or variceal hemorrhage), or until September 2002. Altogether, 29% had a normal BMI, 40% were overweight, and 30% were obese. In a median follow‐up of 59 months, CD occurred in 48/161 (30%) patients with an increasingly higher rate according to BMI group (15% in those with normal BMI; 31% in overweight; 43% in obese patients, P = 0.011). The actuarial probability of developing CD was significantly higher in the abnormal BMI groups (P = 0.022). In a multivariate model that included parameters previously identified as being predictive of CD (HVPG, albumin, Mayo endstage liver disease score), etiology, and treatment group, BMI (hazard ration 1.06; 95% confidence interval 1.01‐1.12), P = 0.02] was an independent predictor of decompensation, together with HVPG and albumin. Conclusion: Obesity has a deleterious effect on the natural history of compensated cirrhosis of all etiologies, independent of portal pressure and liver function. Weight reduction may be a valuable therapeutic measure in this patient population. (HEPATOLOGY 2011;)

Platelet count is not a predictor of the presence or development of gastroesophageal varices in cirrhosis.

Current guidelines recommend esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in patients with cirrhosis to screen for gastroesophageal varices (GEV). Thrombocytopenia has been proposed as a noninvasive test to predict the presence of GEV. There is no agreement regarding a specific platelet count (PLT) that can reliably predict GEV. The present longitudinal study aims to (1) further investigate the relationship between varices and PLT at the time of endoscopy, (2) investigate whether changes in PLT from the baseline over time can predict the development of GEV, and (3) investigate whether changes in PLT correlate with the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). A secondary analysis was conducted for 213 subjects with compensated cirrhosis with portal hypertension but without GEV enrolled in a randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind trial of a nonselective beta‐blocker used to prevent GEV. PLTs were obtained every 3 months, and HVPG measurements and EGD were done annually. The PLTs were compared between subjects who did and did not develop GEV. In a median follow‐up of 54.9 months, 84 patients developed GEV. PLT was greater than 150,000 in 15% of patients at the development of GEV. A receiver operating curve did not show any PLT with high sensitivity or specificity for the presence of GEV. Subjects with clinically insignificant portal hypertension (HVPG < 10 mm Hg) whose PLT remained greater than 100,000 had a 2‐fold reduction in the occurrence of GEV (P = 0.0374). A significant correlation was found between HVPG and PLT at the baseline, year 1, and year 5 (P < 0.0001). Conclusion: Cross‐sectional or longitudinal evaluations of PLTs are inadequate noninvasive markers for GEV. Patients with mild portal hypertension whose PLT remains greater than 100,000 have significantly less risk of GEV. Although HVPG correlates somewhat with PLT, changes in PLT cannot be used as a surrogate for HVPG changes. (HEPATOLOGY 2008;47:153–159.)

Does Lower Esophageal Sphincter Incompetency Contribute to Esophageal Variceal Bleeding

The purpose of this study is to determine whether lower esophageal sphincter (LES) incompetency is a common occurrence in patients with liver cirrhosis and contributes to the development of variceal bleeding. Resting LES pressure (17.8 ± 1.1 mm Hg) in 35 patients with cirrhosis was similar to that of our control population (17.3 ± mm Hg). No differences were found among patients with ascites, variceal hemorrhage, or with different degrees of hepatic decompensation. In both patients and control subjects the LES responded with a significant pressure increase to gastric alkalinization. Symptoms and radiological evidence of gastroesophageal reflux were extremely uncommon in patients with liver cirrhosis. Based on these data it is unlikely that acid-pepsin regurgitation is a significant factor in the development of variceal hemorrhage.

Gastroesophageal Reflux and Bleeding Esophageal Varices

The incidence of gastroesophageal reflux was evaluated with the use of a pH probe in 12 patients with cirrhosis and recent variceal hemorrhage and in 15 healthy control subjects. Short episodes of reflux occurred in 42% of the patients and in 47% of the controls. During an observation period of 1 hr, the cumulative duration of reflux was similar in patients (2.5 +/- 1.3 min) and controls (3.1 +/- 1.4 min). Mean lower esophageal sphincter pressures were normal in both groups but did not show a significant correlation with the duration of reflux. These data support previous observations that gastroesophageal reflux dose not appear to be a contributing factor in the development of variceal hemorrhage.

Novel inflammatory biomarkers of portal pressure in compensated cirrhosis patients

The rationale for screening inflammatory serum biomarkers of the hepatic vein pressure gradient (HVPG) is based on the fact that portal hypertension is pathogenically related to liver injury and fibrosis, and that in turn these are associated with the activation of inflammatory pathways. This was a nested cohort study in the setting of a randomized, clinical trial to assess the development of gastroesophageal varices (GEV) (N Engl J Med 2005;353:2254). Patients had cirrhosis and portal hypertension but did not have GEV. A total of 90 patients who had baseline day‐1 sera available were enrolled in the present study. The objective of this study was to determine whether inflammatory biomarkers in conjunction with clinical parameters could be used to develop a predictive paradigm for HVPG. The correlations between HVPG and interleukin (IL)‐1β (P = 0.0052); IL‐1R‐α (P = 0.0085); Fas‐R (P = 0.0354), and serum VCAM‐1 (P = 0.0007) were highly significant. By using multivariate logistic regression analysis and selected parameters (transforming growth factor beta [TGFβ]; heat shock protein [HSP]‐70; at‐risk alcohol use; and Child class B) we could exclude HVPG ≥12 mmHg with 86% accuracy (95% confidence interval [CI]: 67.78 to 96.16%) and the sensitivity was 87.01% (95% CI: 69.68 to 96.34%). Therefore, the composite test could identify 86% of compensated cirrhosis patients with HVPG below 12 mmHg and prevent unnecessary esophagogastroduodenoscopy with its associated morbidity and costs in these patients. Our diagnostic test was not efficient in predicting HVPG ≥12 mmHg. Conclusion: A blood test for HVPG could be performed in cirrhosis patients to prevent unnecessary esophagogastroduodenoscopy. (Hepatology 2014;59:1052–1059)