Search

BACKGROUND Natriuretic peptides are involved in the cascade of pathophysiological events occurring in liver cirrhosis, counterbalancing vasoconstriction and anti-natriuretic factors. The effects of natriuretic peptides as treatment of cirrhotic ascites have been investigated only in small studies, and definitive results are lacking. AIM To examine the effects and safety of natriuretic peptides in cirrhosis patients with ascites. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Embase for all available studies applying intravenous administration of any natriuretic peptide to patients suffering from cirrhotic ascites. Inclusion was not limited by treatment duration or dose, or by follow-up duration. Both randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies were eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was change in renal sodium excretion. Secondary outcomes included safety measures and changes in renal water excretion, plasma aldosterone concentration, and plasma renin activity. RESULTS Twenty-two studies were included. Atrial natriuretic peptide (ANP) was the only intensively studied treatment. Sodium excretion increased in response to continuous ANP infusion and was more pronounced when infusion rates of > 30 ng/kg/min were administered compared with ≤ 30 ng/kg/min (P < 0.01). Moreover, natriuresis was significantly higher in study subgroups with mild/moderate ascites compared with moderate/severe and refractory ascites (P < 0.01). ANP infusions increased renal water excretion, although without reaching a statistically significant dose-response gradient. Plasma aldosterone concentration and plasma renin activity were significantly lower at baseline in study subgroups achieving a negative sodium balance in response to an ANP administration compared with treatment non-responders ( P < 0.01). Blood pressure decreases occurred less frequently when ANP doses ≤ 30 ng/kg/min were applied. The quality of evidence for a natriuret

Background & Aims: We performed a randomized trial to determine whether albumin should be administered to patients with infections unrelated to spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). Methods: We performed a multicenter, open-label trial in which 118 patients with cirrhosis, non-SBP infections, and additional risk factors for poor outcome were randomly assigned to receive antibiotics plus albumin (study group; n = 61) or antibiotics alone (control group; n = 57). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; secondary outcomes were effect of albumin on disease course. Results: There were no significant differences at baseline between groups in results from standard laboratory tests, serum markers of inflammation, circulatory dysfunction, or liver severity scores. However, the combined prevalence of acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) and kidney dysfunction was significantly higher in the study group (44.3% vs 24.6% in the control group; P = .02), indicating greater baseline overall severity. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between groups (13.1% in the study group vs 10.5% in the control group; P = .66). Circulatory and renal functions improved in only the study group. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the study group had resolution of ACLF (82.3% vs 33.3% in the control group; P = .03). A significantly lower proportion of patients in the study group developed nosocomial infections (6.6% vs 24.6% in the control group; P = .007). Conclusions: In a randomized trial of patients with advanced cirrhosis and non-SBP infections, in-hospital mortality was similar between those who received albumin plus antibiotics vs those who received only antibiotics (controls). However, patients given albumin were sicker at baseline and, during the follow-up period, a higher proportion had ACLF resolution and a lower proportion had nosocomial infections. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02034279., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Background: Hepatic encephalopathy is a brain dysfunction with neurological and psychiatric changes associated with liver insufficiency or portal-systemic shunting. The severity ranges from minor symptoms to coma. A Cochrane systematic review including 11 randomised clinical trials on branched-chain amino acids (BCAA) versus control interventions has evaluated if BCAA may benefit people with hepatic encephalopathy. Objectives: To evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of BCAA versus any control intervention for people with hepatic encephalopathy. Search methods: We identified trials through manual and electronic searches in The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, and LILACS (May 2017). Selection criteria: We included randomised clinical trials, irrespective of the bias control, language, or publication status. Data collection and analysis: The authors independently extracted data based on published reports and collected data from the primary investigators. We changed our primary outcomes in this update of the review to include mortality (all cause), hepatic encephalopathy (number of people without improved manifestations of hepatic encephalopathy), and adverse events. The analyses included random-effects and fixed-effect meta-analyses. We performed subgroup, sensitivity, regression, and trial sequential analyses to evaluate sources of heterogeneity (including intervention, and participant and trial characteristics), bias (using The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group method), small-study effects, and the robustness of the results after adjusting for sparse data and multiplicity. We graded the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Main results: We found 16 randomised clinical trials including 827 participants with hepatic encephalopathy classed as overt (12 trials) or mi