Search

Background and aims The burden of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is substantial. To address gaps in HCC care, the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases (AASLD) Practice Metrics Committee (PMC) aimed to develop a standard set of process-based measures and patient-reported outcomes along the HCC care continuum. Approach and results We identified candidate process and outcomes measures for HCC care based on structured literature review. A 13-member panel with content expertise across the HCC care continuum evaluated candidate measures on importance and performance gap using a modified Delphi approach (two rounds of rating) to define the final set of measures. Candidate patient-reported outcomes (PRO) based on a structured scoping review were ranked by 74 patients with HCC across 7 diverse institutions. Out of 135 measures, 29 measures made the final set. These covered surveillance (6 measures), diagnosis (6 measures), staging (2 measures), treatment (10 measures), and outcomes (5 measures). Examples included the use of ultrasound (± alpha-fetoprotein [AFP]) every 6 months, need for surveillance in high-risk populations, diagnostic testing for patients with a new AFP elevation, multidisciplinary liver tumor board (MLTB) review of Liver Imaging-Reporting and Data System 4 lesions, standard evaluation at diagnosis, treatment recommendations based on Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer staging, MLTB discussion of treatment options, appropriate referral for evaluation of liver transplantation candidacy, and role of palliative therapy. PROs include those related to pain, anxiety, fear of treatment, and uncertainty about the best individual treatment and the future. Conclusions The AASLD PMC has developed a set of explicit quality measures in HCC care to help bridge the gap between guideline recommendations and measurable processes and outcomes. Measurement and subsequent implementation of these metrics could be a central step in the improvement of patient care and outcomes in this high-risk population.

Palliative care (PC) benefits patients with serious illness including end-stage liver disease (ESLD). As part of a cluster randomized trial, hepatologists were trained to deliver primary palliative care to patients with ESLD using an online course, Palliative Care Always: Hepatology (PCA:Hep). Here we present a multimethod formative evaluation (feasibility, knowledge acquisition, self-efficacy, and practice patterns) of PCA:Hep. Feasibility was measured by completion of coursework and achieving a course grade of >80%. Knowledge acquisition was measured through assessments before and throughout the course. Pre/post-course surveys were conducted to determine self-efficacy and practice patterns. The hepatologists (n = 39) enrolled in a 12-week online course and spent 1-3 hours on the course weekly. The course was determined to be feasible as 97% successfully completed the course and 100% passed. The course was acceptable to participants; 91.7 % reported a positive course experience and satisfaction with knowledge gained (91.6%). The pre/post knowledge assessment showed an improvement of 6.0% (pre 85.9% to post 91.9%, 95% CI [2.8, 9.2], P = 0.001). Self-efficacy increased significantly (P < 0.001) in psychological symptom management, hospice, and psychosocial support. A year after training, over 80% of the hepatologists reported integrating a variety of PC skills into routine patient care. Conclusion: PCA:Hep is feasible, acceptable, and improves learner knowledge and confidence in palliative care skills. This is a viable method to teach primary PC skills to specialists caring for patients with ESLD.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and frailty are major drivers of outcomes among patients with cirrhosis. What is unknown is the impact of physical frailty on the development of AKI. We included adults with cirrhosis without hepatocellular carcinoma listed for liver transplantation at nine US centers (n=1,033). Frailty was assessed using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI); "frail" was defined by LFI≥4.2. Chronic kidney disease as a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate

Introduction The prevalence and significance of acute liver injury in patients with COVID-19 are poorly characterized. Methods Patients with confirmed COVID-19 who were hospitalized in geographically diverse medical centers in North America were included. Demographics, symptoms, laboratory data results, and outcomes were recorded. Linear and logistic regression identified factors associated with liver injury, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay (LOS). Results Among 1555 patients in the cohort, most (74%) had an elevated alanine aminotransferase (ALT) during hospitalization, which was very severe (> 20 × upper limit of normal [ULN]) in 3%. Severe acute liver injury (ALI) was uncommon, occurring in 0.1% on admission and 2% during hospitalization. No patient developed acute liver failure (ALF). Higher ALT was associated with leukocytosis (per mL3) (β 10.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.7–12.6, p 20 × ULN (unadjusted OR 6.0, 95%CI 3.1–11.5, p 3 × ULN (unadjusted OR 4.4, 95%CI 2.5–7.7, p

Lifestyle modification is currently the only treatment for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). The most effective way to motivate behavior change in this population is not well understood. The aims of this study were to characterize the association between patient disease knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors and to determine the impact of an educational intervention. Adults with NAFLD had the following assessed before and after an educational intervention: (1) disease knowledge; (2) health-related quality of life (HRQOL); (3) physical activity; (4) diet; (5) stages of change; and (6) clinical variables. Median age of the cohort (N = 248) was 53.5, 46% were male, 85% were white, and median body mass index was 33.9. Forty-eight percentage had nonalcoholic steatohepatitis, and 28% had cirrhosis. The median correct knowledge score was 73.6%, median Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire-NAFLD was 5.2/7, and diet score was 7/16 (higher indicating unhealthy diets). The cohort was sedentary at baseline, with 46% and 60% in active phases of change for nutrition and physical activity, respectively. Fifty-six (22%) had all three high-risk behaviors (sedentary, poor diet scores, low stage of change), which was independently associated with depression. The educational intervention improved diet scores, HRQOL, stages of change, and weight. Despite good disease knowledge, NAFLD participants were sedentary and 1/4 had high-risk lifestyle behaviors. An educational intervention had positive impacts on clinical outcomes, though effect size was small. Pairing educational interventions with targeted interventions to motivate behavior change can improve care for patients with NAFLD.

Chronic liver disease (CLD) is a progressive illness with high symptom burden and functional and cognitive impairment, often with comorbid mental and substance use disorders. These factors lead to significant deterioration in quality of life, with immense burden on patients, caregivers, and healthcare. The current healthcare system in the United States does not adequately meet the needs of patients with CLD or control costs given the episodic, reactive, and fee-for-service structure. There is also a need for clinical and financial accountability for CLD care. In this context, we describe the key elements required to shift the CLD care paradigm to a patient-centered and value-based system built upon the Porter model of value-based health care. The key elements include (1) organization into integrated practice units, (2) measuring and incorporating meaningful patient-reported outcomes, (3) enabling technology to allow innovation, (4) bundled care payments, (5) integrating palliative care within routine care, and (6) formalizing centers of excellence. These elements have been shown to improve outcomes, reduce costs, and improve overall patient experience for other chronic illnesses and should have similar benefits for CLD. Payers need to partner with providers and systems to build upon these elements and help align reimbursements with patients' values and outcomes. The national organizations such as the American Association for Study of Liver Diseases need to guide key stakeholders in standardizing these elements to optimize patient-centered care for CLD.

Content available: Audio Recording.

BACKGROUND & AIMS Bariatric surgery is common, but alcohol misuse has been reported following these procedures. We aimed to determine if bariatric surgery is associated with increased risk of alcohol-related cirrhosis (AC) and alcohol misuse. METHODS Retrospective observational analysis of obese adults with employer-sponsored insurance administrative claims from 2008 to 2016. Subjects with diagnosis codes for bariatric surgery were included. Primary outcome was risk of AC. Secondary outcome was risk of alcohol misuse. Bariatric surgery was divided into before 2008 and after 2008 to account for patients who had a procedure during the study period. Cox proportional hazard regression models using age as the time variable were used with interaction analyses for bariatric surgery and gender. RESULTS A total of 194 130 had surgery from 2008 to 2016 while 209 090 patients had bariatric surgery prior to 2008. Age was 44.1 years, 61% women and enrolment was 3.7 years. A total of 4774 (0.07%) had AC. Overall risk of AC was lower for those who received sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic banding during the study period (HR 0.4, P

ImportanceFrailty has been recognized as a risk factor for mortality after liver transplant (LT) but little is known of its association with functional status and health-related quality of life (HRQL), termed global functional health, in LT recipients.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between pre-LT and post-LT frailty with post-LT global functional health.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis prospective cohort study was conducted at 8 US LT centers and included adults who underwent LT from October 2016 to February 2020.ExposuresFrail was defined by a pre-LT Liver Frailty Index (LFI) score of 4.5 or greater.Main Outcomes and MeasuresGlobal functional health at 1 year after LT, assessed using surveys (Short Form-36 [SF-36; summarized by physical component scores (PFC) and mental component summary scores (MCS)], Instrumental Activities of Daily Living scale) and performance-based tests (LFI, Fried Frailty Phenotype, and Short Physical Performance Battery).ResultsOf 358 LT recipients (median [IQR] age, 60 [53-65] years; 115 women [32%]; 25 [7%] Asian/Pacific Islander, 21 [6%] Black, 54 [15%] Hispanic White, and 243 [68%] non-Hispanic White individuals), 68 (19%) had frailty pre-LT. At 1 year post-LT, the median (IQR) PCS was lower in recipients who had frailty vs those without frailty pre-LT (42 [31-53] vs 50 [38-56]; P = .002), but the median MCS was similar. In multivariable regression, pre-LT frailty was associated with a −5.3-unit lower post-LT PCS (P P P = .01).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, pre-LT frailty was associated with worse global functional health 1 year after LT. The presence of frailty after LT was also associated with worse HRQL in physical, but not mental, subdomains. These data suggest that interventions and therapeutics that target frailty that are administered before and/or early post-LT may help to improve the health and well-being of LT recipients.

Background Liver transplant candidacy determination can be contentious. When transplantation is declined for reasons perceived as violating fundamental rights or discriminating against a protected class-for example, age, race, religion, nationality-the case may involve a constitutional claim. Judicial review of such cases may result in decisions with sweeping implications for transplant policy. Methods We reviewed all published court opinions involving liver transplantation in 2 legal databases (Lexis Nexus and WestLaw). We included all cases that involved a denial of liver transplant candidacy in violation of constitutional rights. Results The search returned 1562 cases: 290 involved the denial of insurance coverage for a transplant due to a patient's failure to abstain from drinking, 273 cases involved incarcerated inmates who were denied a liver transplant, 2 involved a constitutional claim for patient requesting a bloodless transplant for religious reasons, and 2 cases arose from age discrimination in transplant criteria. These cases highlight legal pitfalls related to the First Amendment (religious freedom), Eighth Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment), and the Fourteenth Amendment (equal protection and due process). Conclusions The risk of a constitutional claim highlights concrete steps needed to ensure the equity of transplant policy. These include efforts to standardize transplant candidacy criteria across payers for candidates with alcohol-related liver disease and advanced age. Efforts to constrain emerging liabilities related to the citizenship of transplant candidates and the definition of donor service areas are also discussed.

Frailty is a well-established risk factor for poor outcomes in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT), but whether it predicts outcomes among those who have undergone LT is unknown.Adult LT recipients from 8 US centers (2012-2019) were included. Pre-LT frailty was assessed in the ambulatory setting using the Liver Frailty Index (LFI). "Frail" was defined by an optimal cut point of LFI ≥ 4.5. We used the 75th percentile to define "prolonged" post-LT length of stay (LOS; ≥12 days), intensive care unit (ICU) days (≥4 days), and inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (≥17 days). Of 1166 LT recipients, 21% were frail pre-LT. Cumulative incidence of death at 1 and 5 years was 6% and 16% for frail and 4% and 10% for nonfrail patients (overall log-rank p = 0.02). Pre-LT frailty was associated with an unadjusted 62% increased risk of post-LT mortality (95% CI, 1.08-2.44); after adjustment for body mass index, HCC, donor age, and donation after cardiac death status, the HR was 2.13 (95% CI, 1.39-3.26). Patients who were frail versus nonfrail experienced a higher adjusted odds of prolonged LT LOS (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.47-2.73), ICU stay (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.12-2.14), inpatient days within 90 post-LT days (OR, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.25-2.37), and nonhome discharge (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.58-3.97).Compared with nonfrail patients, frail LT recipients had a higher risk of post-LT death and greater post-LT health care utilization, although overall post-LT survival was acceptable. These data lay the foundation to investigate whether targeting pre-LT frailty will improve post-LT outcomes and reduce resource utilization.

Background Frailty commonly complicates cirrhosis and associates with poorer outcomes. While patients with cirrhosis may be sedentary, there are few comprehensive descriptions of their physical activity (PA) patterns related to frailty. Our aim was to identify PA characteristics that may be used in interventions to improve PA and reduce frailty. Methods In a cross-sectional cohort study, forty patients with cirrhosis (mean age 63; 30 non-frail, 10 frail) wore an accelerometer/thermal sensing armband for 7 days. Postural status (e.g. upright movement, upright sedentary, lying down), Metabolic Equivalent of Tasks (METs) and active bouts were identified. Results Patients were highly sedentary most of the time (89±7% and 85±10% of the day, in frail and non-frail cirrhotics respectively). Compared with non-frail cirrhotics, frail patients spent significantly shorter amounts of time moving in an upright position (7%±5 vs. 12%±5, p=0.013 in frail and non-frail cirrhotics respectively), had significantly fewer and shorter durations of active bouts per day (number of active bouts: 9±12 vs. 19±14; duration: 13.2±1.5 minutes and 15.9±2.6 minutes in frail and non-frail cirrhotics respectively), and had lower amount of steps per wear time hours (41.7±37.1 vs. 116.8±85.4, p=0.003 in frail and non-frail respectively). Traditional measures such as METs or aerobic bouts did not differ between groups. Conclusions Active bout measures, as opposed to more traditional measures such as METs, differentiate between frail and non-frail cirrhotics suggesting they may be used to assess changes resulting from targeted interventions to improve physical activity.

Objective inpatient frailty assessments in decompensated cirrhosis are understudied. We examined the feasibility of inpatient frailty measurements and associations with nonhome discharge, readmission, and all-cause mortality among patients admitted for cirrhosis complications. We conducted a prospective study at 3 liver transplantation (LT) centers. Frailty was assessed using the liver frailty index (LFI). Multivariable logistic and competing risk models evaluated associations between frailty and clinical outcomes. We included 211 patients with median MELD-Na score 21 (interquartile range [IQR],15–27); 96 (45%) were women, and 102 (48%) were on the LT waiting list. At a median follow-up of 8.3 months, 29 patients (14%) were nonhome discharged, 144 (68%) were readmitted, 70 (33%) underwent LT, and 44 (21%) died. A total of 124 patients (59%) were frail, with a median LFI of 4.71 (IQR, 4.07–5.54). Frail patients were older (mean, 59 versus 54 years) and more likely to have chronic kidney disease (40% versus 20%; P = 0.002) and coronary artery disease (17% versus 7%; P = 0.03). Frailty was associated with hospital-acquired infections (8% versus 1%; P = 0.02). In multivariable models, LFI was associated with nonhome discharge (odds ratio, 1.81 per 1-point increase; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14–2.86). Frailty (LFI≥4.5) was associated with all-cause mortality in models accounting for LT as competing risk (subhazard ratio [sHR], 2.4; 95% CI, 1.13–5.11); results were similar with LFI as a continuous variable (sHR, 1.62 per 1-point increase; 95% CI, 1.15–2.28). A brief, objective inpatient frailty assessment was feasible and predicted nonhome discharge and mortality in decompensated cirrhosis. Inpatient point-of-care frailty assessment prior to hospital discharge can be useful for risk stratification and targeted interventions to improve physical fitness and reduce adverse outcomes.

End-stage liver disease (ESLD) is associated with high symptom burden, poor quality of life, and significant healthcare costs. Palliative care, which is not synonymous with hospice or end-of-life care, is a multidisciplinary model of care that focuses on patient-centered goals with the intent of improving quality of life and reducing suffering. This review will summarize current literature supporting the benefits of early integration of palliative care in patients in this population.Advance care planning (ACP) and goals of care discussions have been associated with improved quality of life, decreased anxiety, and improved satisfaction with care for both the patient and the caregiver. These discussions are beneficial to all patients with ESLD, including those listed for liver transplantation.Despite the resounding benefits of palliative care for patients with other advanced diseases, palliative care remains underutilized in liver disease. There is an urgent need for education of hepatology/transplant providers as well as development of society guidelines to help dissemination and acceptability of palliative care for patients with ESLD.

Background & Aims Frailty is associated with mortality in patients with cirrhosis. We measured frailty using 3 simple tests and calculated Liver Frailty Index (LFI) scores for patients at multiple ambulatory centers. We investigated associations between LFI scores, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and mortality. Methods Adults without hepatocellular carcinoma who were on the liver transplantation waitlist at 9 centers in the United States (N = 1044) were evaluated using the LFI; LFI scores of at least 4.5 indicated that patients were frail. We performed logistic regression analyses to assess associations between frailty and ascites or HE and competing risk regression analyses (with liver transplantation as the competing risk) to estimate sub-hazard ratios (sHRs) of waitlist mortality (death or removal from the waitlist). Results Of study subjects, 36% had ascites, 41% had HE, and 25% were frail. The odds of frailty were higher for patients with ascites (adjusted odd ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15–2.14) or HE (odd ratio 2.45, 95% CI 1.80–3.33) than for those without these features. Larger proportions of frail patients with ascites (29%) or HE (30%) died while on the waitlist compared with patients who were not frail (17% of patients with ascites and 20% with HE). In univariable analysis, ascites (sHR 1.52, 95% CI 1.14–2.05), HE (sHR 1.84, 95% CI 1.38–2.45), and frailty (sHR 2.38, 95% CI 1.77–3.20) were associated with waitlist mortality. In adjusted models, only frailty remained significantly associated with waitlist mortality (sHR 1.82, 95% CI 1.31–2.52); ascites and HE were not. Conclusions Frailty is a prevalent complication of cirrhosis that is observed more frequently in patients with ascites or HE and independently associated with waitlist mortality. LFI scores can be used to objectively quantify risk of death related to frailty—in excess of liver disease severity—in patients with cirrhosis.

Health care delivery is increasingly evaluated according to quality measures, yet such measures are underdeveloped for cirrhosis. The Practice Metrics Committee of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases was charged with developing explicit process-based and outcome-based measures for adults with cirrhosis. We identified candidate measures from comprehensive reviews of the literature and input from expert clinicians and patient focus groups. We conducted an 11-member expert clinician panel and used a modified Delphi method to systematically identify a set of quality measures in cirrhosis. Among 119 candidate measures, 46 were identified as important measures to define the quality of cirrhosis care, including 26 process measures, 7 clinical outcome measures, and 13 patient-reported outcome measures. The final process measures captured care processes for ascites (n = 5), varices/bleeding (n = 7), hepatic encephalopathy (n = 4), hepatocellular cancer (HCC) screening (n = 1), liver transplantation evaluation (n = 2), and other care (n = 7). Clinical outcome measures included survival, variceal bleeding and rebleeding, early-stage HCC, liver-related hospitalization, and rehospitalization within 7 and 30 days. Patient-reported outcome measures covered physical symptoms, physical function, mental health, general function, cognition, social life, and satisfaction with care. The final list of patient-reported outcomes was validated in 79 patients with cirrhosis from nine institutions in the United States. Conclusion: We developed an explicit set of evidence-based quality measures for adult patients with cirrhosis. These measures are a tool for providers and institutions to evaluate their care quality, drive quality improvement, and deliver high-value cirrhosis care. The quality measures are intended to be applicable in any clinical care setting in which care for patients with cirrhosis is provided.

Healthcare reimbursement is shifting from fee-for-service to fee-for-value. Cirrhosis, which costs the U.S. healthcare system as much as heart failure, is a prime target for value-based care. This article describes models in which physician groups or health systems are paid for improving quality and lowering costs for a given population of patients with cirrhosis. If done correctly, we believe that such frameworks, once adopted, could help reduce burnout by freeing physicians of the burden of checking boxes in the electronic medical record so that they can devote their energies to managing populations. Conclusion: Value-based payment models for cirrhosis have the potential to benefit patients, physicians, and healthcare insurers.

This paper seeks an efficient way to screen a population of patients at risk for hepatocellular carcinoma when (1) each patient’s disease evolves stochastically and (2) there are limited screening resources shared by the population. Recent medical discoveries have shown that biological information can be learned at each screening to differentiate patients into varying levels of risk for cancer. We investigate how to exploit this knowledge to choose which patients to screen to maximize early-stage cancer detections while limiting resource usage. We model the problem as a family of restless bandits, with each patient’s disease progression evolving as a partially observable Markov decision process. We derive an optimal policy for this problem and discuss managerial insights into what characterizes more effective screening. To provide numerical evidence, we use two independent data sets of over 800 patients, one to train the optimal policy, and the other to build a computer simulation to act as a test bed for said policy. We are able to show that our policy detects 22% more early-stage cancers than current practice, while using the same amount of resource expenditure. We provide insights into the structure underlying our policy and discuss the implications of our findings. The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2017.0697 .

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Cirrhosis leads to malnutrition and muscle wasting that manifests as frailty, which may be influenced by cirrhosis aetiology. We aimed to characterize the relationship between frailty and cirrhosis aetiology. METHODS: Included were adults with cirrhosis listed for liver transplantation (LT) at 10 US centrer who underwent ambulatory testing with the Liver Frailty Index (LFI; ‘frail’ = LFI ≥ 4.4). We used logistic regression to associate aetiologies and frailty, and competing risk regression (LT as the competing risk) to determine associations with waitlist mortality (death/delisting for sickness). RESULTS: Of 1,623 patients, rates of frailty differed by aetiology: 22% in chronic hepatitis C, 31% in alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), 32% in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), 21% in autoimmune/cholestatic and 31% in ‘other’ (P < .001). In univariable logistic regression, ALD (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.09), NAFLD (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.18-2.29) and ‘other’ (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1. 06-2.36) were associated with frailty. In multivariable logistic regression, only ALD (OR 1.40; 95% 1.01-1.94) and ‘other’ (OR 1.59; 95% 1.05-2.40) remained associated with frailty. A total of 281 (17%) patients died/were delisted for sickness. In multivariable competing risk regression, LFI was associated with waitlist mortality (sHR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.06), but aetiology was not (P > .05 for each). No interaction between frailty and aetiology on the association with waitlist mortality was found (P > .05 for each interaction term). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty is more common in patients with ALD, NAFLD and ‘other’ aetiologies. However, frailty was associated with waitlist mortality independent of cirrhosis aetiology, supporting the applicability of frailty across all cirrhosis aetiologies.

Background and aims Frailty, as measured by the Liver Frailty Index (LFI), is associated with liver transplant (LT) waitlist mortality. We sought to identify an optimal LFI cutoff that predicts waitlist mortality. Approach and results Adults with cirrhosis awaiting LT without hepatocellular carcinoma at nine LT centers in the United States with LFI assessments were included. Multivariable competing risk analysis assessed the relationship between LFI and waitlist mortality. We identified a single LFI cutoff by evaluating the fit of the competing risk models, searching for the cutoff that gave the best model fit (as judged by the pseudo-log-likelihood). We ascertained the area under the curve (AUC) in an analysis of waitlist mortality to find optimal cutoffs at 3, 6, or 12 months. We used the AUC to compare the discriminative ability of LFI+Model for End Stage Liver Disease-sodium (MELDNa) versus MELDNa alone in 3-month waitlist mortality prediction. Of 1,405 patients, 37 (3%), 82 (6%), and 135 (10%) experienced waitlist mortality at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. LFI was predictive of waitlist mortality across a broad LFI range: 3.7-5.2. We identified an optimal LFI cutoff of 4.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.0-4.8) for 3-month mortality, 4.2 (95% CI, 4.1-4.4) for 6-month mortality, and 4.2 (95% CI, 4.1-4.4) for 12-month mortality. The AUC for prediction of 3-month mortality for MELDNa was 0.73; the addition of LFI to MELDNa improved the AUC to 0.79. Conclusions LFI is predictive of waitlist mortality across a wide spectrum of LFI values. The optimal LFI cutoff for waitlist mortality was 4.4 at 3 months and 4.2 at 6 and 12 months. The discriminative performance of LFI+MELDNa was greater than MELDNa alone. Our data suggest that incorporating LFI with MELDNa can more accurately represent waitlist mortality in LT candidates.

Radiology does not routinely solicit feedback on radiology reports. The aim of the study is to report the feasibility and initial results of a multi-institutional quality improvement project implementing patient and provider feedback for radiology reports.A HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-waived quality improvement effort at two institutions obtaining patient and provider feedback for radiology reports was implemented from January 2018 to May 2020.A two-question survey (quantitative review and open text box feedback) was embedded into the electronic health records for patients and providers. Text-based feedback was evaluated, and patterns of feedback were categorized: thoroughness of reports, error in reports, timeliness of reports, access to reports, desire for patient summary, and desire for key images. We performed the χOf 367 responses, patients provided 219 of 367 (60%), and providers provided 148 of 367 (40%) of the feedback. A higher proportion of patients reported satisfaction with reports (76% versus 65%, P = .023) and provided more feedback compared with providers (71% versus 50%, P.0001). Both patients and providers commented on the thoroughness of reports (12% of patients versus 9% of providers) and errors in reports (8% of patients and 9% of providers). Patients disproportionately commented on timeliness of reports (11%) and access to the reports (6%) compared with providers (3% each). In addition, 7% of patients expressed a desire for patient summaries.Report-specific patient and provider feedback demonstrate the feasibility of embedding surveys into electronic medical records. Up to 9% of the feedback addressed an error in reports.

To assess healthcare costs and hospitalization rates associated with rifaximin therapy versus lactulose alone among patients at risk for hepatic encephalopathy (HE). IBM Marketscan Commercial and Optum’s de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart databases were used separately to identify commercially insured HE patients treated with rifaximin or lactulose alone, using an algorithm developed with clinical experts. HE-related hospitalizations were defined based on an algorithm using diagnosis codes and diagnosis-related group codes. HE-related/all-cause hospital admissions/days and healthcare costs were compared between rifaximin and lactulose episodes using incidence rate ratios and adjusted cost differences. In Marketscan, there were 13,515 [Optum: 5,217] rifaximin episodes and 9,946 [4,897] lactulose alone episodes included. Yearly rates of HE-related hospital admissions decreased by 33% [34%] when treated with rifaximin versus lactulose alone, and rates of HE-related hospital days similarly decreased by 43% [57%]. Yearly rates of all-cause hospital admissions decreased by 27% [27%]; rates of all-cause hospital days decreased by 33% [37%] during rifaximin episodes versus lactulose alone. This translated to $2,417 [$2,301] and $173 [$397] lower total mean medical costs and HE-related hospital costs per-patient-per-month, respectively (p Patients incurred significantly lower rates of HE-related and all-cause hospitalizations during rifaximin versus lactulose episodes, resulting in lower facility and professional costs. Cost savings may be possible if rifaximin adherence is improved in HE patients. The study is subject to limitations common to claims-based analyses.

Background & Aims The prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remain uncertain. We aimed to assess the prevalence, spectrum, severity, and significance of digestive manifestations in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. Methods Consecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were abstracted manually from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19. Results A total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least 1 gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were increased to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76–1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.80–2.12) were not associated independently with mechanical ventilation or death. Conclusions Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common, but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course.

Hepatocellular carcinoma is the most frequent liver tumor and is associated with chronic liver disease in 90% of cases. In selected cases, liver transplantation represents an effective therapy with excellent overall survival.Since the introduction of Milan criteria in 1996, numerous alternative selection systems to LT for HCC patients have been proposed. Debate remains about how best to select HCC patients for transplant and how to prioritize them on the waiting list.The selection of the best scoring system to propose in the context of LT for HCC is far to be identified. In this review, we analyze and categorize the various selection systems, assessing their roles in the different decisional phases.

BackgroundThe prevalence and significance of digestive manifestations in COVID-19 remain uncertain.MethodsConsecutive patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were identified across a geographically diverse alliance of medical centers in North America. Data pertaining to baseline characteristics, symptomatology, laboratory assessment, imaging, and endoscopic findings from the time of symptom onset until discharge or death were manually abstracted from electronic health records to characterize the prevalence, spectrum, and severity of digestive manifestations. Regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between digestive manifestations and severe outcomes related to COVID-19.ResultsA total of 1992 patients across 36 centers met eligibility criteria and were included. Overall, 53% of patients experienced at least one gastrointestinal symptom at any time during their illness, most commonly diarrhea (34%), nausea (27%), vomiting (16%), and abdominal pain (11%). In 74% of cases, gastrointestinal symptoms were judged to be mild. In total, 35% of patients developed an abnormal alanine aminotransferase or total bilirubin level; these were elevated to less than 5 times the upper limit of normal in 77% of cases. After adjusting for potential confounders, the presence of gastrointestinal symptoms at any time (odds ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.76-1.15) or liver test abnormalities on admission (odds ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.12) were not independently associated with mechanical ventilation or death.ConclusionsAmong patients hospitalized with COVID-19, gastrointestinal symptoms and liver test abnormalities were common but the majority were mild and their presence was not associated with a more severe clinical course

Alcoholic hepatitis (AH) is a condition of acute liver inflammation in the setting of heavy alcohol use that is often managed with corticosteroids in severe cases. Among non-responders to steroids, however, prognosis is poor with up to 75% mortality within 6 months after treatment failure. Early liver transplantation (LT) can achieve an acceptable short-term survival, and initial studies have demonstrated 3-year survival rates of up to 84%. However, the practice of early LT in severe AH remains controversial with concerns over the 6-month rule of sobriety and risk of alcohol relapse post-transplant. Proponents of LT advocate for better understanding of alcohol use as a disorder rather than self-inflicted cause of illness, aim to redefine the misguided application of the 6-month rule, and point out similar relapse rates among patients with early LT and those with greater than 6 months abstinence before transplant. Opponents of LT emphasize the correlation between alcohol relapse and graft failure and mortality, public resistance and potential for distrust among donors, and arguments that transplant centers need to establish improved models to predict relapse and standardize candidate selection criteria across centers. Here we review recent literature on this controversy and provide recommendations for moving forward to consensus.

Background/Aims: Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a technically challenging procedure rarely associated with severe postprocedure complications. Hormonal changes during pregnancy promote cholelithiasis, but there are limited clinical data available on the outcomes of ERCP in pregnant women. ERCP techniques without irradiation were recently introduced as potential alternative. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety of ERCP in pregnancy and to compare outcomes of radiation versus nonradiation ERCP. Materials and Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Medline/Ovid, Web of Science, and Google Scholar through April 18th, 2018 using PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines identified 27 studies reporting the outcomes of ERCP in pregnancy. Random effects pooled event rate and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Heterogeneity was measured by I2, and meta-regression analysis was conducted. Adverse outcomes were divided into fetal, maternal pregnancy-related, and maternal nonpregnancy-related. Results: In all, 27 studies reporting on 1,307 pregnant patients who underwent ERCP were identified. Median age was 27.1 years. All results were statistically significant (P < 0.01). The pooled event rate for overall adverse outcomes was 15.9% (95% CI = 0.132–0.191) in all studies combined, 17.6% (95% CI = 0.109–0.272) in nonradiation ERCP (NR-ERCP) subgroup and 21.6% (95% CI = 0.154–0.294) in radiation ERCP subgroup. There was no significant difference in the pooled event rate for fetal adverse outcomes in NR-ERCP 6.2% (95% CI = 0.027–0.137) versus 5.2% (95% CI = 0.026–0.101) in radiation ERCP group. There was no significant difference in maternal pregnancy-related adverse outcome event rate between NR-ERCP (8.4%) (95% CI = 0.038–0.173) and radiation ERCP (7.1%) (95% CI = 0.039–0.125). Maternal nonpregnancy-related adverse outcome event rate in NR-ERCP was 7.6% (95% CI = 0.038–0.145), which was half the event rate in radiation ERCP group of 14.9% (95% CI = 0.102–0.211). Conclusions: ERCP done by experienced endoscopists is a safe procedure during pregnancy. Radiation-free techniques appear to reduce the rates of nonpregnancy-related complications, but not of fetal and pregnancy-related complications.

Background & Aims To date, studies evaluating the association between frailty and mortality in patients with cirrhosis have been limited to assessments of frailty at a single time point. We aimed to evaluate changes in frailty over time and their association with death/delisting in patients too sick for liver transplantation. Methods Adults with cirrhosis, listed for liver transplantation at 8 US centers, underwent ambulatory longitudinal frailty testing using the liver frailty index (LFI). We used multilevel linear mixed-effects regression to model and predict changes in LFI (ΔLFI) per 3 months, based on age, gender, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD)-Na, ascites, and hepatic encephalopathy, categorizing patients by frailty trajectories. Competing risk regression evaluated the subhazard ratio (sHR) of baseline LFI and predicted ΔLFI on death/delisting, with transplantation as the competing risk. Results We analyzed 2,851 visits from 1,093 outpatients with cirrhosis. Patients with severe worsening of frailty had worse baseline LFI and were more likely to have non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, diabetes, or dialysis-dependence. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 223 (20%) of the overall cohort died/were delisted because of sickness. The cumulative incidence of death/delisting increased by worsening ΔLFI group. In competing risk regression adjusted for baseline LFI, age, height, MELD-Na, and albumin, a 0.1 unit change in ΔLFI per 3 months was associated with a 2.04-fold increased risk of death/delisting (95% CI 1.35–3.09). Conclusion Worsening frailty was significantly associated with death/delisting independent of baseline frailty and MELD-Na. Notably, patients who experienced improvements in frailty had a lower risk of death/delisting. Our data support the longitudinal measurement of frailty, using the LFI, in patients with cirrhosis and lay the foundation for interventional work aimed at reversing frailty. Lay summary Frailty, as measured at a single time point, is predictive of death in patients with cirrhosis, but whether changes in frailty over time are associated with death is unknown. In a study of over 1,000 patients with cirrhosis who underwent frailty testing, we demonstrate that worsening frailty is strongly linked with mortality, regardless of baseline frailty and liver disease severity. Notably, patients who experienced improvements in frailty over time had a lower risk of death/delisting. Our data support the longitudinal measurement of frailty in patients with cirrhosis and lay the foundation for interventional work aimed at reversing frailty.

Patients with cirrhosis seek improvement in their symptoms, functioning, quality of life, and satisfaction with the care they receive. However, these patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are not routinely measured for clinical care, research, or quality improvement. The members of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases Practice Metrics Committee, charged with developing quality indicators for clinical practice, performed a scoping review of PROs in cirrhosis. The aim is to synthesize a comprehensive set of PROs for inclusion into a standard patient-centered outcome set. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Trial Library since inception, with final searches run between April 20 and June 1, 2017. Studies were included if they reported the construction and/or validation of a PRO instrument for patients with cirrhosis or if they assessed the clinical (case-mix) variables determining responses to established PRO scales. Eleven studies were selected that yielded 259 items specific to patients with cirrhosis. After removing duplicates, 152 unique items were isolated. These items were consolidated into seven domains: physical symptoms, physical function, mental health, general function, cognition, social life, and satisfaction with care. The seven domains included 52 subdomains (e.g., physical domain, abdominal pain subdomain). Twelve variables were identified that independently modified established PRO scales. These included clinical factors (severity of liver disease and its complications, medication burden, and comorbidities), specific PROs (cramps, pruritis), and surrogate outcome measures (falls, hospitalization). Conclusion This scoping review identified and categorized a large existing set of PRO concepts that matter to patients with cirrhosis; these outcomes may now be translated into usable measures both for the assessment of the quality of cirrhosis care in clinical practice and to perform research from the patient's perspective. (Hepatology 2018;67:2375-2383).

Aims Alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) is the second leading cause of liver transplantation performed in the USA and Europe. We aimed to provide a narrative review of the major ethical issues governing transplantation for ALD. Methods We performed a narrative review of the ethical concepts in organ allocation for ALD, including alcoholic hepatitis. Results Ethical concerns regarding organ allocation for ALD involve issues of urgency, utility and justice. Post-transplant outcomes for ALD patients are good and ethical considerations limiting organs solely because of alcohol etiology do not bear scrutiny. Conclusion ALD will continue to be a major cause for liver failure. The main criteria for transplant in ALD should be the patient's risk of return to harmful drinking, alongside standard assessments of physical and psychosocial fitness for transplant.

The availability of direct-acting antiviral agents for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has resulted in a profound shift in the approach to the management of this infection. These changes have affected the practice of solid organ transplantation by altering the framework by which patients with end-stage organ disease are managed and receive organ transplants. The high level of safety and efficacy of these medications in patients with chronic HCV infection provides the opportunity to explore their use in the setting of transplanting organs from HCV-viremic patients into non-HCV-viremic recipients. Because these organs are frequently discarded and typically come from younger donors, this approach has the potential to save lives on the solid organ transplant waitlist. Therefore, an urgent need exists for prospective research protocols that study the risk versus benefit of using organs for hepatitis C-infected donors. In response to this rapidly changing practice and the need for scientific study and consensus, the American Society of Transplantation convened a meeting of experts to review current data and develop the framework for the study of using HCV viremic organs in solid organ transplantation.