Tandon, Puneeta

INTRODUCTION: Perception of the ascites burden and its effects on quality of life may be different between sexes. This study assessed sex differences in perception of ascites burden and its impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with recurrent or refractory ascites. METHODS: The North American Consortium for the Study of End-stage Liver Disease prospectively enrolled outpatients with cirrhosis and large ascites requiring repeat large volume paracenteses. Demographics, laboratory results, comorbidities, medications, frailty measurements, and self-reported questionnaires related to functional status, physical activities, and HRQoL (generic = Short Form 36 and ascites specific = Ascites Questionnaire) were compared between sexes. RESULTS: In total, 392 men (59.6 ± 10.7 years) and 184 women (59.5 ± 11.1 years) with predominantly alcohol-related liver disease (51% and 43%, respectively) and median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Na: 13 were enrolled. Both groups had similar comorbidities and cirrhosis complications, ascites duration and severity, and frailty scores ( P = 0.94). Women had more symptoms related to their ascites (Ascites Questionnaire score = 66 ± 21 vs 60 ± 21 in men, P = 0.001) (higher value = feeling worse). 35% of women felt depressed vs 22% of men ( P = 0.0009), with lower mental but not physical functioning components of Short Form 36 ( P = 0.019). Women continued to conduct their daily activities as adequately as men as indicated by Duke Status Activity Index ( P = 0.27) and Godin Leisure Activity Index ( P = 0.47). DISCUSSION: Women with cirrhosis and ascites experienced worse emotional HRQoL than men without difference in daily function. Our analyses underscore the differences in the lived experience of women vs men with cirrhosis and highlight the need for patient-reported metrics to provide patient-centered care.

Abstract Cirrhosis is complicated by a high rate of nosocomial infections (NIs), which result in poor outcomes and are challenging to predict using clinical variables alone. Our aim was to determine predictors of NI using admission serum metabolomics and gut microbiota in inpatients with cirrhosis. In this multicenter inpatient cirrhosis study, serum was collected on admission for liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry metabolomics, and a subset provided stool for 16SrRNA analysis. Hospital course, including NI development and death, were analyzed. Metabolomic analysis using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) (demographics, Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease [MELD] admission score, white blood count [WBC], rifaximin, and infection status adjusted) and random forest analyses for NI development were performed. Additional values of serum metabolites over clinical variables toward NI were evaluated using logistic regression. Stool microbiota and metabolomic correlations were compared in patients with and without NI development. A total of 602 patients (231 infection admissions) were included; 101 (17%) developed NIs, which resulted in worse inpatient outcomes, including intensive care unit transfer, organ failure, and death. A total of 127 patients also gave stool samples, and 20 of these patients developed NIs. The most common NIs were spontaneous bacterial peritonitis followed by urinary tract infection, Clostridioides difficile, and pneumonia. A total of 247 metabolites were significantly altered on ANCOVA. Higher MELD scores (odds ratio, 1.05; p < 0.0001), admission infection (odds ratio, 3.54; p < 0.0001), and admission WBC (odds ratio, 1.05; p = 0.04) predicted NI (area under the curve, 0.74), which increased to 0.77 (p = 0.05) with lower 1‐linolenoyl‐glycerolphosphocholine (GPC) and 1‐stearoyl‐GPC and higher N‐acetyltryptophan and N‐acetyl isoputreanine. Commensal microbiota were lower and pathobionts were higher in those who developed NIs. Microbial–metabolite correlation networks were complex and dense in patients with NIs, especially sub‐networks centered on Ruminococcaceae and Pseudomonadaceae. NIs are common and associated with poor outcomes in cirrhosis. Admission gut microbiota in patients with NIs showed higher pathobionts and lower commensal microbiota. Microbial–metabolomic correlations were more complex, dense, and homogeneous among those who developed NIs, indicating greater linkage strength. Serum metabolites and gut microbiota on admission are associated with NI development in cirrhosis.

AbstractBackgroundThe prognosis of acute kidney disease (AKD), defined as a glomerular filtration rate of <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 or a rise in serum creatinine (sCr) of <50% for <3 months, is not clearly known.AimTo study the prevalence, predictive factors and clinical outcomes in hospitalized cirrhotic patients with AKD.MethodsThe North American Consortium for the Study of End‐Stage Liver Disease prospectively enrolled hospitalized decompensated cirrhotic patients. Patients were separated into those with normal renal function (controls or C), AKD or stage 1 AKI as their worst renal dysfunction per International Club of Ascites definition and compared. Parameters assessed included demographics, laboratory data, haemodynamics, renal and patient outcomes.Results1244 patients with cirrhosis and ascites (C: 704 or 57%; AKD: 176 or 14%; stage 1 AKI: 364 or 29%) with similar demographics were enrolled. AKD patients had similar baseline sCr but higher hospital admission in the previous 6 months, and higher peak sCr, compared to controls, with their peak sCr being lower than that in stage 1 AKI patients (all P < .0001). The in‐hospital and 30‐day survival for AKD patients were intermediary between that for controls and stage 1 AKI patients (96% vs 91% vs 86%, P < .0001). The strongest predictors for AKD development while in hospital were the presence of a second infection (OR: 2.44) and diabetes (OR: 1.53).ConclusionsPatients with AKD had intermediate outcomes between stage 1 AKI and controls. AKD patients, especially those with diabetes and a second infection, need careful monitoring and prompt treatment for AKD to prevent negative outcomes.

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a major cause of morbidity in cirrhosis. However, its severity assessment is often subjective, which needs to be studied systematically. The aim was to determine how accurately trainee and nontrainee practitioners grade and manage HE patients throughout its severity. We performed a survey study using standardized simulated patient videos at 4 US and 3 Canadian centers. Participants were trainees (gastroenterology/hepatology fellows) and nontrainees (faculty, nurse practitioners, physician assistants). We determined the accuracy of HE severity identification and management options between grades <2 or ≥2 HE and trainees/nontrainees. In total, 108 respondents (62 trainees, 46 nontrainees) were included. For patients with grades <2 versus ≥2 HE, a higher percentage of respondents were better at correctly diagnosing grades ≥2 compared with grades <2 (91% versus 64%; P < 0.001). Specialized cognitive testing was checked significantly more often in grades <2, whereas more aggressive investigation for precipitating factors was ordered in HE grades >2. Serum ammonia levels were ordered in almost a third of grade ≥2 patients. For trainees and nontrainees, HE grades were identified similarly between groups. Trainees were less likely to order serum ammonia and low‐protein diets, more likely to order rifaximin, and more likely to perform a more thorough workup for precipitating factors compared with nontrainee respondents. There was excellent concordance in the classification of grade ≥2 HE between nontrainees versus trainees, but lower grades showed discordance. Important differences were seen regarding blood ammonia, specialized testing, and nutritional management between trainees and nontrainees. These results have important implications at the patient level, interpreting multicenter clinical trials, and in the education of practitioners. Liver Transplantation 24 587–594 2018 AASLD.

The North American Consortium for the Study of End‐Stage Liver Disease's definition of acute‐on‐chronic liver failure (NACSELD‐ACLF) as two or more extrahepatic organ failures has been proposed as a simple bedside tool to assess the risk of mortality in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. We validated the NACSELD‐ACLF's ability to predict 30‐day survival (defined as in‐hospital death or hospice discharge) in a separate multicenter prospectively enrolled cohort of both infected and uninfected hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. We used the NACSELD database of 14 tertiary care hepatology centers that prospectively enrolled nonelective hospitalized patients with cirrhosis (n = 2,675). The cohort was randomly split 60%/40% into training (n = 1,605) and testing (n = 1,070) groups. Organ failures assessed were (1) shock, (2) hepatic encephalopathy (grade III/IV), (3) renal (need for dialysis), and (4) respiratory (mechanical ventilation). Patients were most commonly Caucasian (79%) men (62%) with a mean age of 57 years and a diagnosis of alcohol‐induced cirrhosis (45%), and 1,079 patients had an infection during hospitalization. The mean Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease score was 19, and the median Child score was 10. No demographic differences were present between the two split groups. Multivariable modeling revealed that the NACSELD‐ACLF score, as determined by number of organ failures, was the strongest predictor of decreased survival after controlling for admission age, white blood cell count, serum albumin, Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease score, and presence of infection. The c‐statistics were 0.8073 for the training set and 0.8532 for the validation set. Conclusion: Although infection status remains an important predictor of death, NACSELD‐ACLF was independently validated in a separate large multinational prospective cohort as a simple, reliable bedside tool to predict 30‐day survival in both infected and uninfected patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of cirrhosis. (H epatology 2018;67:2367‐2374).