Pérez, Martina

ImportanceThere are no useful treatments to prevent the development of severe complications of liver cirrhosis. Simvastatin and rifaximin have shown beneficial effects in liver cirrhosis.ObjectiveTo assess whether simvastatin combined with rifaximin improves outcomes in patients with decompensated cirrhosis.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsDouble-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial conducted among patients with decompensated cirrhosis in 14 European hospitals between January 2019 and December 2022. The last date of follow-up was December 2022.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to receive simvastatin, 20 mg/d, plus rifaximin, 1200 mg/d (n = 117), or identical-appearing placebo (n = 120) for 12 months in addition to standard therapy, stratified according to Child-Pugh class B or C.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was incidence of severe complications of liver cirrhosis associated with organ failure meeting criteria for acute-on-chronic liver failure. Secondary outcomes included transplant or death and a composite end point of complications of cirrhosis (ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, variceal bleeding, acute kidney injury, and infection).ResultsAmong the 237 participants randomized (Child-Pugh class B: n = 194; Child-Pugh class C: n = 43), 72% were male and the mean age was 57 years. There were no differences between the 2 groups in terms of development of acute-on-chronic liver failure (21 [17.9%] vs 17 [14.2%] patients in the treatment and placebo groups, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.65-2.34; P = .52); transplant or death (22 [18.8%] vs 29 [24.2%] patients in the treatment and placebo groups, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.43-1.32; P = .32); or development of complications of cirrhosis (50 [42.7%] vs 55 [45.8%] patients in the treatment and placebo groups, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.63-1.36; P = .70). Incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups (426 vs 419; P = .59), but 3 patients in the treatment group (2.6%) developed rhabdomyolysis.Conclusions and RelevanceThe addition of simvastatin plus rifaximin to standard therapy does not improve outcomes in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03780673

AbstractWhether tubular injury develops in patients with acute kidney injury owing to hepatorenal syndrome (AKI‐HRS) is controversial. We performed repeated measurements of biomarkers of tubular injury during a 14‐day period in 60 patients with cirrhosis and AKI (34 with AKI‐HRS meeting the classical definition of type 1 HRS and 26 with AKI owing to acute tubular necrosis, AKI‐ATN). Nineteen of 34 patients had resolution of AKI‐HRS, while the remainder had persistent AKI‐HRS. The persistence of AKI‐HRS was associated with remarkably high short‐term mortality. There were no significant differences in urinary NGAL or IL‐18 between patients with resolution vs those with persistent AKI‐HRS throughout the 14‐day period. By contrast, biomarker levels were significantly lower in AKI‐HRS, even if persistent, compared to AKI‐ATN. These findings are highly suggestive of lack of significant tubular injury in AKI‐HRS and could be of value in the clinical decision between combined liver–kidney or liver transplantation alone in patients with cirrhosis and AKI candidates to transplantation.

OBJECTIVES: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is common in advanced cirrhosis and is characterized by marked neuropsychiatric abnormalities. However, despite its severity and effects on brain function, the impact of HE on psychological status of patients has not been adequately assessed. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of HE on psychological status of patients and their informal caregivers. METHODS: Fifteen patients with cirrhosis and episodic or persistent HE and their corresponding informal caregivers were included. Semistructured interviews were performed in patients and caregivers. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed by the short-form 36 in both patients and caregivers, and the Zarit burden score was measured in caregivers. The analysis of interviews was performed using qualitative methodology. RESULTS: HE causes a major psychological impact on patients with HE. The first episode of HE caused a very significant impact that was reported with deep feelings, mainly of fear, anger, misery, anxiety, and sorrow, which persisted with time. Symptoms causing more psychological impact on patients were impaired ability to walk and speak. All effects were associated with a marked impairment in QoL. The psychological impact was also marked in caregivers who had a major burden, as assessed by the Zarit score. Moreover, QoL, particularly the mental component score, was markedly impaired in caregivers in intensity similar to that of patients. DISCUSSION: HE has a profound psychological impact on patients and their informal caregivers, associated with a marked negative influence on QoL. The psychological effects of HE on patients and caregivers should be evaluated and treated.