Using MR elastography to assess portal hypertension and response to beta-blockers in patients with cirrhosis.

BACKGROUND: MR elastography can determine organ-related stiffness, which reflects the degree of fibrosis. Liver stiffness increases in cirrhosis, and stiffness increases further post-prandially due to increased portal blood in-flow. Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) reduce the portal venous inflow, but their effect on liver and spleen stiffness are disputed. AIMS: To assess whether MR elastography of the liver or spleen reflects the severity of cirrhosis, whether treatment with NSBB changes liver and spleen stiffness and whether changes in stiffness can predict the effect of NSBB on portal pressure. METHODS: Fifty-two patients with cirrhosis underwent liver vein catheterization and two-dimensional (2D) MR elastography on separate days. Thirty-six of the patients had a hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) of ≥12 mmHg and were tested prior to, and after, intravenous infusion of NSBB using HVPG measurement and MR elastography. RESULTS: HVPG showed a strong, positive, linear relationship with liver stiffness (r2  = 0.92; P < .001) and spleen stiffness (r2  = 0.94; P < .001). The cut-off points for identifying patients with a HVPG ≥ 12 mmHg were 7.7 kPa for liver stiffness (sensitivity 0.78, specificity 0.64) and 10.5 kPa for spleen stiffness (sensitivity 0.8, specificity 0.79). Intravenous administration of NSBB significantly decreased spleen stiffness by 6.9% (CI: 3.5-10.4, P < .001), but NSBB had no consistent effect on liver stiffness. However, changes in spleen stiffness were not related to the HVPG response (P = .75). CONCLUSIONS: Two-dimensional MR elastographic estimation of liver or spleen stiffness reflects the degree of portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis, but changes in stiffness after NSBB do not predict the effect on HVPG.

[Outpatient control and rehabilitation in decompensated liver cirrhosis should be an interdisciplinary approach].

There are no rehabilitative offers to patients, who are discharged following a hospitalisation with decompensated liver cirrhosis. The development and implementation of a comprehensive rehabilitative offer can lead to early detection and treatment of complications, which could eventually result in hospitalisation. In this review, we argue, that prevention of hospitalisation, self-care, quality of life, patient satisfaction and compliance should form the basis of a rehabilitative offer for patients with liver cirrhosis.

Allocation of patients with liver cirrhosis and organ failure to intensive care: Systematic review and a proposal for clinical practice.

AIM: To propose an allocation system of patients with liver cirrhosis to intensive care unit (ICU), and developed a decision tool for clinical practice. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. The search includes studies on hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and organ failure, or acute on chronic liver failure and/or intensive care therapy. RESULTS: The initial search identified 660 potentially relevant articles. Ultimately, five articles were selected; two cohort studies and three reviews were found eligible. The literature on this topic is scarce and no studies specifically address allocation of patients with liver cirrhosis to ICU. Throughout the literature, there is consensus that selection criteria for ICU admission should be developed and validated for this group of patients and multidisciplinary approach is mandatory. Based on current available data we developed an algorithm, to determine if a patient is candidate to intensive care if needed, based on three scoring systems: premorbid Child-Pugh Score, Model of End stage Liver Disease score and the liver specific Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score. CONCLUSION: There are no established systems for allocation of patients with liver cirrhosis to the ICU and no evidence-based recommendations can be made.

Long-term effects and colectomy rates in ulcerative colitis patients treated with infliximab: a Danish single center experience.

OBJECTIVE: Infliximab (IFX) is a well-established treatment for both acute, severe ulcerative colitis (UC) and chronic, refractory UC. However, data on the long-term clinical outcome and colectomy rates after IFX treatment in a routine clinical setting are sparse. The aim of this study was to provide further data on the long-term effect of IFX for acute, severe and chronic, refractory UC in unselected patients treated at a single center. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients (n = 52) treated with IFX for UC before February 2009 was performed. The material comprised 19 patients (37%) with acute, severe UC and 33 patients (63%) with chronic, refractory UC. The primary outcome was colectomy rate; the secondary outcome clinical response. RESULTS: The overall colectomy rate was 27% (14/52 patients) after a median follow-up of 22 months (range 4-57 months). The colectomy rate was 37% (7/19 patients) in the group with acute, severe UC and 21% (7/33 patients) among those with chronic, refractory UC. In all, 77% of the patients had clinical response to IFX treatment with no difference between the two subgroups. Among those with an initial clinical response, 50% (20/40 patients) had sustained clinical response. CONCLUSION: IFX is of long-term benefit as rescue treatment in selected patients with acute, severe UC with about two-thirds of the patients avoiding colectomy. The beneficial effect on colectomy rate in chronic, refractory UC seems less convincing although these patients may still achieve a sustained clinical response.

Pregnancy-associated plasma protein A in non-cardiac conditions.

OBJECTIVE: PAPP-A is a promising new marker in coronary heart disease. It is important to investigate its specificity in order to establish its clinical utility as a marker of coronary heart disease. DESIGN AND METHODS: PAPP-A was measured within 24 h following hospital admission in 1448 consecutive patients admitted with diagnoses other than acute coronary syndromes. RESULTS: PAPP-A was detectable (> or = 4.0 mIU/L) in 278 (19.2%) patients, among whom the mean level was 6.3 mIU/L (95% C.I., 6.1-6.5 mIU/L). The 95 and 99 percentiles for PAPP-A were 7.3 and 9.4 mIU/L, respectively. There was no difference in the mean PAPP-A of different diagnoses (p=0.33). None of the specific diagnoses known to influence established coronary markers appeared to influence the level of circulating PAPP-A. CONCLUSION: PAPP-A is low in patients without known coronary heart disease. PAPP-A levels seem to be a potentially highly specific marker for heart disease.