Murad, M Hassan

SummaryBackgroundHepatitis E virus (HEV) infection appears to be more common than previously thought. HEV seroprevalence in patients on maintenance haemodialysis (HD) is unclear with a range from 0% to 44%. In addition, risk factors of transmission of HEV in patients on haemodialysis are unknown.AimTo perform a systematic review and meta‐analysis of HEV seroprevalence in HD patients compared with controls.MethodsA systematic search of several databases identified all observational studies with comparative arms. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed the methodological quality. A random‐effects model was used for pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of positive anti‐HEV IgG in both groups. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed with appropriate tests.ResultsWe identified 31 studies from 17 countries between 1994 and 2016. Sixteen studies were judged to have adequate quality and 15 to have moderate limitations. HEV infection was more prevalent in patients on haemodialysis compared with controls (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.79‐3.40, I2 = 75.2%, P < .01). We conducted several subgroup analyses without difference in results. Egger regression test did not suggest publication bias (P = .83). Specific risk factors of HEV transmission in patients on haemodialysis were not clearly identified.ConclusionsHepatitis E virus infection is more prevalent in patients on haemodialysis compared with non‐haemodialysis control groups. Further studies are needed to determine risk factors of acquisition, impact on health, and risk for chronic HEV especially among those patients going to receive organ transplantation.

Multiphasic computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are both used for noninvasive diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with cirrhosis. To determine if there is a relative diagnostic benefit of one over the other, we synthesized evidence regarding the relative performance of CT, extracellular contrast–enhanced MRI, and gadoxetate‐enhanced MRI for diagnosis of HCC in patients with cirrhosis. We also assessed whether liver biopsy versus follow‐up with the same versus alternative imaging is best for CT‐indeterminate or MRI‐indeterminate liver nodules in patients with cirrhosis. We searched multiple databases from inception to April 27, 2016, for studies comparing CT with extracellular contrast–enhanced MRI or gadoxetate‐enhanced MRI in adults with cirrhosis and suspected HCC. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. Of 33 included studies, 19 were comprehensive, while 14 reported sensitivity only. For all tumor sizes, the 19 comprehensive comparisons showed significantly higher sensitivity (0.82 versus 0.66) and lower negative likelihood ratio (0.20 versus 0.37) for MRI over CT. The specificities of MRI versus CT (0.91 versus 0.92) and the positive likelihood ratios (8.8 versus 8.1) were not different. All three modalities performed better for HCCs ≥2 cm. Performance was poor for HCCs <1 cm. No studies examined whether adults with cirrhosis and an indeterminate nodule are best evaluated using biopsy, repeated imaging, or alternative imaging. Concerns about publication bias, inconsistent study results, increased risk of bias, and clinical factors precluded support for exclusive use of either gadoxetate‐enhanced or extracellular contrast–enhanced MRI over CT.Conclusion:CT, extracellular contrast–enhanced MRI, or gadoxetate‐enhanced MRI could not be definitively preferred for HCC diagnosis in patients with cirrhosis; in patients with cirrhosis and an indeterminate mass, there were insufficient data comparing biopsy to repeat cross‐sectional imaging or alternative imaging. (Hepatology2018;67:401‐421).

Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) who are listed for liver transplantation (LT) are often treated while on the waiting list with locoregional therapy (LRT), which is aimed at either preventing progression of HCC or reducing the measurable disease burden of HCC in order to receive increased allocation priority. We aimed to synthesize evidence regarding the effectiveness of LRT in the management of patients with HCC who were on the LT waitlist. We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple databases from 1996 to April 25, 2016, for studies that enrolled adults with cirrhosis awaiting LT and treated with bridging or down‐staging therapies before LT. Therapies included transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, transarterial radioembolization, ablation, and radiotherapy. We included both comparative and noncomparative studies. There were no randomized controlled trials identified. For adults with T1 HCC and waiting for LT, there were only two nonrandomized comparative studies, both with a high risk of bias, which reported the outcome of interest. In one series, the rate of dropout from all causes at 6 months in T1 HCC patients who underwent LRT was 5.3%, while in the other series of T1 HCC patients who did not receive LRT, the dropout rate at median follow‐up of 2.4 years and the progression rate to T2 HCC were 30% and 88%, respectively. For adults with T2 HCC awaiting LT, transplant with any bridging therapy showed a nonsignificant reduction in the risk of waitlist dropout due to progression (relative risk [RR], 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06‐1.85; I 2 = 0%) and of waitlist dropout from all causes (RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.060‐2.370; I 2 = 85.7%) compared to no therapy based on three comparative studies. The quality of evidence is very low due to high risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. There were five comparative studies which reported on posttransplant survival rates and 10 comparative studies which reported on posttransplant recurrence, and there was no significant difference seen in either of these endpoints. For adults initially with stage T3 HCC who received LRT, there were three studies reporting on transplant with any down‐staging therapy versus no downstaging, and this showed a significant increase in 1‐year (two studies, RR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01‐1.23) and 5‐year (1 study, RR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.03‐1.32) post‐LT survival rates for patients who received LRT. The quality of evidence is very low due to serious risk of bias and imprecision. Conclusion: In patients with HCC listed for LT, the use of LRT is associated with a nonsignificant trend toward improved waitlist and posttransplant outcomes, though there is a high risk of selection bias in the available evidence. (H epatology 2018;67:381‐400).

Summary Objective The outcomes of patients with metastatic phaeochromocytoma (PHEO) and paraganglioma (PGL) are unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of baseline characteristics and mortality rates of patients with metastatic PHEO and PGL (PPGL). Design Ovid MEDLINE In‐Process & Other Non‐Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Ovid Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, and references of key articles were searched from inception to 2016. Patients Studies comprised ≥20 patients with metastatic PPGL and reported baseline characteristics and follow‐up data. Measurements Reviewers extracted standardized data and assessed risk of bias using a modified Newcastle‐Ottawa tool. Random‐effects meta‐analysis was used to pool event rates across studies. Results Twenty retrospective noncomparative studies reported on 1338 patients with metastatic PHEO (685/1296, 52.9%) and PGL (611/1296, 47.1%), diagnosed at a mean age of 43.9 ± 5.2 years. Mean follow‐up was 6.3 ± 3.2 years. Of 532 patients with reported data, 40.4% had synchronous metastases. Five‐year (7 studies, n = 738) and 10‐year (2 studies, n = 55) mortality rates for patients with metastatic PPGL were 37% (95% CI, 24%‐51%) and 29% (95% CI, 17%‐42%), respectively. Higher mortality was associated with male sex (RR 1.50; 95% CI, 1.11‐2.02) and synchronous metastases (RR 2.43; 95% CI, 1.01‐5.85). Conclusions Available low‐quality evidence from heterogeneous studies suggests low mortality rates of patients with metastatic PPGL. Male sex and synchronous metastases correlated with increased mortality. The outcomes of patients with metastatic PPGL have been inadequately assessed, indicating the need for carefully planned prospective studies.

Background and Purpose— Because of the perceived risk of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (AKI), many centers require pre-imaging serum creatinine levels, potentially delaying care. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating AKI rates in patients with acute ischemic stroke receiving computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and computed tomographic perfusion (CTP). Methods— We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Web of Science through December 2016 for studies reporting on AKI in patients with acute ischemic stroke receiving CTA/CTP. Using a random-effects model, estimates were pooled across studies. Outcomes of interest were (1) the odds of AKI in patients receiving CTA/CTP versus noncontrast computed tomography, (2) overall rate of AKI and hemodialysis in patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing CTA/CTP, and (3) the odds of CTA/CTP-associated AKI among patients with and without chronic kidney disease. Results— Fourteen studies were included (6 case–control studies and 8 single-arm studies) with 5727 CTA/CTP and 981 noncontrast computed tomography patients. In case–control studies, AKI was significantly lower among CTA/CTP patients compared with noncontrast computed tomography patients (odds ratio=0.47; 95% confidence interval=0.33–0.68; P <0.01). Adjusting for baseline creatinine, there was no difference in AKI rates between groups (odds ratio=0.34; 95% confidence interval=0.10–1.21). The overall rate of AKI in CTA/CTP patients was 3% (95% confidence interval=2%–4%). The overall rate of hemodialysis in the CTA/CTP group was 0.07% (3 of 4373). There was no difference in AKI among CTA/CTP patients with and without chronic kidney disease (odds ratio=0.63; 95% confidence interval=0.34–1.12). Conclusions— Nonrandomized evidence suggests that CTA/CTP are not associated with statistically significant increase in risk of AKI in patients with stroke, even those with known chronic kidney disease.

AbstractBackgroundColonic pseudo‐obstruction (CPO) is characterized by colonic distention in the absence of mechanical obstruction or toxic megacolon. Concomitant secretory diarrhea (SD) with hypokalemia (SD‐CPO) due to gastrointestinal (GI) loss requires further characterization.AimTo perform a systematic review of SD‐CPO, report a case study, and compare SD‐CPO with classical CPO (C‐CPO).MethodsWe performed a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Scopus for reports based on a priori criteria for CPO, SD and GI loss of potassium. An additional case at Mayo Clinic was included.ResultsNine publications met inclusion criteria, with a total of 14 cases. Six studies had high, three moderate, and our case high methodological quality. Median age was 74 years (66‐97), with 2:1 male/female ratio. Kidney disease was present in 6/14 patients. Diarrhea was described as profuse, watery, or viscous in 10 patients. Median serum, stool, and urine potassium concentrations (mmol/L) were 2.4 (range: 1.9‐3.1), 137 (100‐180), and 17 (8‐40), respectively. Maximal diameter of colon and cecum (median) were 10.2 cm and 10.5 cm, respectively. Conservative therapy alone was effective in five out of 14 patients. Median potassium supplementation was 124 mEq/d (40‐300). Colonic decompression was effective in three out of six patients; one had a total colectomy; three out of 14 had died. The main differences between SD‐CPO and C‐CPO were lower responses to treatments: conservative measures (35.7% vs 73.6%, P=.01), neostigmine (17% vs 89.2%, P<.001), and colonic decompression (50% vs 82.4%, P=.02).ConclusionSD‐CPO is a rare phenotype associated with increased fecal potassium and is more difficult to treat than C‐CPO.