Reevaluation of the effect of lamivudine therapy preoperative to prevent HBV recurrence after liver transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis B virus (HBV) recurrence may result in hepatic insufficiency or dysfunction of liver grafts. This study was to reevaluate the preventive effect of lamivudine therapy pretransplant on HBV recurrence after liver transplantation with combined lamivudine and hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) as a prophylactic regimen. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective study of 122 liver transplant recipients operated on from January 2002 to September 2006 at our hospital. All subjects showed positive hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) and HBV DNA in blood, without HBV mutation in YMDD at the time of liver transplantation. The protocol with combined lamivudine and HBIG for preventing HBV recurrence was used on the day of operation. The initial immunosuppression therapy was identical. After one year follow-up, the recipients were divided into 2 groups: patients without HBV recurrence (group I) and patients with HBV recurrence (group II). Preoperative lamivudine therapy and postoperative mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and glucocorticoid therapy were analyzed using the Wilcoxon's test and Stepwise logistic regression method. RESULTS: In the HBV recurrence group, the duration of pre-transplant lamivudine administration was significantly longer than that in the without HBV recurrence group (Z=-4.424, P=0.000). The HBV recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients with preoperative lamivudine therapy than in patients without lamivudine therapy (X2=13.11, P=0.000); the risk of HBV recurrence increased by a 10.909-fold in patients with pre-transplant lamivudine therapy compared with that in patients without lamivudine therapy (OR=10.909; 95% CI for OR: 2.86-41.67). Seven (63.6%) of 11 HBV recurrence recipients had YMDD mutants. The duration of MMF or glucocorticoid was not different between the 2 groups (Z(MMF)=-1.453, P(MMF)=0.146; Z(Pre)=-0.795, P(Pre)=0.427). No significant difference was noted in the HBV recurrent rate in patients with MMF duration < or =6 and >6 months (X2=0.185, P=0.667), as it was in patients with prednisone therapy < or =3 and >3 months (X2=0.067, P=0.793). CONCLUSIONS: With the protocol of combined lamivudine and HBIG for preventing HBV recurrence in liver transplantation recipients, liver transplantation candidates with positive HBV DNA should not be subjected to preoperative administration of lamivudine. A high dose of HBIG during the ahepatic period and in the early stage of post-transplantation can fulfill the treatment target as a long-term lamivudine therapy before liver transplantation. Long-term preoperative lamivudine treatment may result in an earlier HBV mutation in YMDD and increase the HBV recurrence rate and risk in the first year after transplantation.

Lipase and pancreatic amylase activities in diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in patients with hyperamylasemia.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of total serum amylase (AMY) is the most widely used biochemical test for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis, but it is commonly considered a nonspecific marker. To improve the biochemical diagnosis of acute pancreatitis, lipase (LIP) and pancreatic amylase (PAMY) have been tested in recent years. The present study was designed to evaluate whether serum LIP and pancreatic PAMY tests could replace total amylase test to improve diagnostic efficiency in the evaluation of acute pancreatitis in patients with hyperamylasemia. METHODS: LIP and PAMY values were determined in serum samples from 92 patients with hyperamylasemia. Reference values for each enzyme were derived from serum samples of 147 healthy subjects. The activities of LIP and PAMY in patients with various diseases were shown directly by the boxplot graph. The diagnostic accuracy of LIP and PAMY was defined as the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Their sensitivity and specificity in detecting acute pancreatitis at varying cutoff points were shown by the curve, and the best cutoff value for each enzyme was shown by the modified ROC curve. The diagnostic values of LIP, PAMY and LIP+AMY with each upper limit of reference range (ULR) were compared with the corresponding best cutoff values. RESULTS: The references values of LIP and PAMY were 12.2-47.6 U/L and 28-95 U/L, respectively. These values in patients with acute pancreatitis were higher than those patients with other diseases. The areas under the ROC curve (AUC) of LIP and PAMY were 0.799 and 0.792, respectively. With the best diagnostic cutoff point of maximum (sensitivity + specificity)-100%, we obtained values of 97.9 U/L (LIP(97.9)=2.06 X ULR) for LIP and 209 U/L (PAMY(209)=2.20 X ULR) for PAMY. The best cutoff values for LIP, PAMY and LIP+AMY demonstrated the specificity, positive predictive value, and diagnostic efficiency higher than the corresponding ULRs. CONCLUSIONS: Serum LIP and PAMY are specific for the pancreas and might replace total amylase for the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis in hyperamylasemia patients. LIP(97.9) is more efficient than PAMY(209) in the diagnosis of acute pancreatitis. A combined test of both enzymes is not superior to single test of either enzyme in diagnostic accuracy.