Esophageal varices are life-threatening complications in which the enlargement of the esophageal veins causes bleeding and reduces blood flow to the esophagus. They are complications caused by portal hypertension, renal failure, hepatic dysfunction, and infection. The leading cause of esophageal varices is cirrhosis, as patients with this disease are more susceptible to forming esophageal varices. Bleeding episodes occur due to the rupture of the blood vessels. We present the case of a 45-year-old male patient in the hospital with a history of chronic alcohol use and clinical symptoms of hematemesis, a distended abdomen, and melena. The patient experienced mild symptoms of giddiness and dizziness after undergoing various radiological investigations, laboratory tests, ultrasonography (USG), and CT scans. USG diagnosed portal hypertension, gross ascites, pleural effusion, and hepatosplenomegaly. A CT scan diagnosed the patient with esophageal varices and testicular carcinoma. Laboratory tests diagnosed anemia. The treatment plan included oral and intravenous iron supplements, blood transfusions, vitamin B12, folate supplements, and nonselective beta-blockers to manage portal hypertension and reduce variceal bleeding risk. During acute bleeding episodes, vasoconstrictors and endoscopic band ligation were employed. Regular endoscopies and hepatic venous catheterization were conducted to monitor and manage the condition. Follow-up included regular assessments of hemoglobin levels, iron status, liver function tests, and periodic endoscopies. The patient\'s adherence to beta-blockers was closely monitored. Esophageal varices, often resulting from portal hypertension because of cirrhosis, require early diagnosis and a combination of pharmacological and endoscopic treatments to prevent complications. Advances in treatment have reduced mortality rates, but effective management of portal hypertension and liver dysfunction remains crucial.

OBJECTIVE: Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB) are the mainstay for treatment of portal hypertension (PH), but require caution in decompensated cirrhosis (DC) or acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) with hypotension, hyponatremia, acute kidney injury (AKI) or type 2 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). Midodrine is oral, rapidly acting, α1-adrenergic agonist. We evaluated acute effects of midodrine on hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in DC and ACLF with contraindications to NSBB.
METHODS: Patients of DC (n = 30) with grade III ascites and serum sodium (Na) <130/systolic blood pressure (SBP) <90/type II HRS (group I) and ACLF patients (n = 30) with Na <130/SBP <90/AKI (group II) were included. HVPG was done at baseline and repeated 3 h after 10 mg midodrine. Primary outcome was HVPG response (reduction by >20% or to <12 mmHg).
RESULTS: In group I, midodrine significantly reduced HVPG (19.2 ± 4.6 to 17.8 ± 4.2, p = .02) and heart rate (HR) (86.3 ± 11.6 to 77.9 ± 13.1, p < .01) and increased mean arterial pressure (MAP) (74.1 ± 6.9 to 81.9 ± 6.6 mmHg, p < .01). In group II also, midodrine reduced HVPG (19.1 ± 4.1 to 17.0 ± 4.2) and HR (92.4 ± 13.7 to 84.6 ± 14.1) and increased MAP (85.4 ± 7.3 to 91.2 ± 7.6 mmHg), p < .01 for all. HVPG response was achieved in 3/30 (10%) in group I and 8/30 (26.7%) in group II. On logistic regression analysis, prerenal AKI (OR 11.04, 95% CI 1.83-66.18, p < .01) and increase in MAP (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.03-1.43, p = .02) were independent predictors of response. Increase in MAP by 8.5 mmHg with midodrine had best cut-off with AUROC of .76 for response.
CONCLUSIONS: In decompensated cirrhosis and ACLF patients with contraindications to NSBB, midodrine is useful in decreasing HVPG. Dose of midodrine should be titrated to increase MAP atleast by 8.5 mmHg.

UNASSIGNED: EUS-guided portal pressure gradient (PPG) is a novel technique that permits a true, direct measure of portal vein pressure and hepatic vein pressure. This article details our experience and lessons learned from 20 consecutive outpatient EUS-PPG procedures performed at a single center, along with simultaneous EUS-guided liver biopsy, variceal screening, and variceal banding.
UNASSIGNED: Data on the first 20 patients who underwent EUS-PPG at a single center were retrospectively viewed and analyzed. The effects of various liver diseases or other patient-related factors on the clinical and technical success of EUS-PPG measurements, as well as EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB), were evaluated. During the procedure, if esophageal varices were encountered, they were assessed, and if felt to be clinically indicated, endoscopic variceal ligation was performed.
UNASSIGNED: The 20 patients included 10 male and 10 female patients. All procedures were technically successful. In all patients, the portal vein and hepatic veins could be easily identified. One adverse event of bleeding occurred during the EUS-PPG measuring procedure. All 20 EUS-LBs were technically successful and yielded adequate samples for histological evaluations, with an average of 25 complete portal tracts per sample. Among patients with esophageal varices, 40% of patients underwent banding. The mean EUS-PPG among 5 patients with esophageal varices was 11.6 mm Hg, compared with 3.2 mm Hg among 15 patients without esophageal varices.
UNASSIGNED: This study demonstrates that EUS-PPG is a novel, safe, reproducible, and effective technique. Also, the fact that EUS-PPG, EUS-LB, variceal screening, and variceal banding could be performed in 1 session and on an outpatient basis speaks to the growing relevance and impact of the nascent field of endohepatology.

Measurement of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) effectively mirrors the severity of portal hypertension (PH) and offers valuable insights into prognosis of liver disease, including the risk of decompensation and mortality. Additionally, HVPG offers crucial information about treatment response to nonselective beta-blockers and other medications, with its utility demonstrated in clinical trials in patients with PH. Despite the widespread dissemination and validation of noninvasive tests, HVPG still holds a significant role in hepatology. Physicians treating patients with liver diseases should comprehend the HVPG measurement procedure, its applications, and how to interpret the results and potential pitfalls.

Managing complications of liver cirrhosis such as varices needing treatment (VNT) and clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) demands precise and non-invasive diagnostic methods. This study assesses the efficacy of spleen stiffness measurement (SSM) using a 100-Hz probe for predicting VNT and CSPH, aiming to refine diagnostic thresholds. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 257 cirrhotic patients, comparing the diagnostic performance of SSM against traditional criteria, including Baveno VII, for predicting VNT and CSPH. The DeLong test was used for statistical comparisons among predictive models. The success rate of SSM@100 Hz was 94.60%, and factors related to SSM failure were high body mass index and small spleen volume or length. In our cohort, the identified SSM cut-off of 38.9 kPa, which achieved a sensitivity of 92% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98% for detecting VNT, is clinically nearly identical to the established Baveno threshold of 40 kPa. The predictive capability of the SSM-based model for VNT was superior to the LSM ± PLT model (p = 0.017). For CSPH prediction, the SSM model notably outperformed existing non-invasive tests (NITs), with an AUC improvement and significant correlations with HVPG measurements (obtained from 49 patients), highlighting a correlation coefficient of 0.486 (p < 0.001) between SSM and HVPG. Therefore, incorporating SSM into clinical practice significantly enhances the prediction accuracy for both VNT and CSPH in cirrhosis patients, mainly due to the high correlation between SSM and HVPG. SSM@100 Hz can offer valuable clinical assistance in avoiding unnecessary endoscopy in these patients.

BACKGROUND: Propranolol, a non-selective beta-blocker, commonly used to prevent variceal bleed, but might precipitate circulatory dysfunction in severe ascites. Midodrine, an alpha-1 adrenergic agonist improves renal perfusion and systemic hemodynamics. Addition of midodrine might facilitate higher maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of propranolol, thereby less risk of variceal bleed in cirrhosis patients with severe ascites.
METHODS: 140 patients with cirrhosis and severe/refractory ascites were randomized- propranolol and midodrine (Gr.A,n = 70) or propranolol alone (Gr.B,n = 70). Primary outcome was incidence of bleed at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included ascites control, achievement of target heart rate (THR), HVPG response and adverse effects.
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between two groups. Cumulative incidence of bleed at 1 year was lower in Gr.A than B (8.5%vs.27.1%,p-0.043). The MTD of propranolol was higher in Gr.A (96.67 ± 36.6 mg vs. 76.52 ± 24.4 mg; p-0.01) and more patients achieved THR (84.2%vs.55.7%,p-0.034). Significantly higher proportion of patients in Gr.A had complete resolution of ascites [17.1%vs.11.4%,p-0.014), diuretic tolerance (80%vs.60%,p-0.047) at higher doses(p-0.02) and lesser need for paracentesis. Patients in Gr.A also had greater reduction in variceal grade (75.7%vs.55.7%;p-0.01), plasma renin activity (54.4% from baseline) (p = 0.02). Mean HVPG reduction was greater in Gr.A than B [4.38 ± 2.81 mmHg(23.5%) vs. 2.61 ± 2.87 mmHg(14.5%),p-0.045]. Complications like post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis on follow-up were higher in Gr.B than A (22.8%vs.51.4%,p = 0.013 and 10%vs.15.7%, p = 0.03, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Addition of midodrine facilitates effective use of propranolol in higher doses and greater HVPG reduction, thereby preventing first variceal bleed, reduced paracentesis requirements with fewer ascites- related complications in patients with cirrhosis with severe/refractory ascites.

BACKGROUND: Physical exercise (PE) has been proven to be beneficial in patients with cirrhosis; effects in cognitive function and cerebral hemodynamics, are yet to be explored.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of a PE program (LFN-exercise protocol) in hepatic/cerebral hemodynamics.
METHODS: Randomized open clinical trial in patients with cirrhosis; Control: Diet(n = 13),Intervention: Diet + exercise(n = 14) for 12 weeks. Patients received an educational session, mental exercises (printed book and sudoku), and high-protein diet. Exercise intervention consisted of walking 4 times/week with an intensity rated between 12 and 14 on the Borg scale, monitored through bracelet accelerometers. Patients received weekly text messages to encourage adherence and had monthly in-person visits.
RESULTS: Patients were mainly Child-Pugh A(88.9 %), median MELD 8(8-10), mean age 53±8 years. In the exercise group the number of steps increased from 9667±3008 to 11,931±4463 (p = 0.002), vs 8004±3224 to 8903±3504 (p = 0.053) in controls. Exercise decreased HVPG from 11(8-14) to 8(6-11)mmHg (p = 0.032) vs no change in the control group from 14(12-16) to 15(11-17)mmHg (p = 0.959). Intervention group showed better cerebral hemodynamics, cognitive function, nutritional status and quality of life after the intervention. Adherence was >90 %, with no adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: The LFN-exercise protocol improves portal hypertension, cerebral hemodynamics and cognitive function, as well as nutritional status and quality of life.
RESULTS:
UNASSIGNED: NCT03932552.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Embolization of large portosystemic shunts effectively controls gastric variceal bleeding and prevents hepatic encephalopathy. The significance of dynamic changes in hepatic venous pressure gradient before and after embolization on clinical events and patient outcomes remains unknown.
UNASSIGNED: In this retrospective single-center series, 46 patients with gastric variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, or both undergoing embolization (January 2018 to October 2020) were included, and dynamic changes in portal pressures were analyzed against patient outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: Males predominated. The most common portosystemic shunt syndrome was the lienorenal shunt. In all, 34 patients underwent embolization for hepatic encephalopathy and 11 for gastric variceal bleeding. The proportion of patients surviving at the end of 12 and 32 months was 86.96 and 54.35%, respectively. The hepatic venous pressure gradient before shunt embolization was 13.4 ± 3.2 and 16.9 ± 3.7 mm Hg after occlusion (p < 0.001). Bleeding from varices on overall follow-up was notable in five patients (10.9%), and overt hepatic encephalopathy in four (N = 42, 9.5%) patients at 6-12 months. The development of infections within 100 days and beyond the first year was associated with the risk of dying at the end of 12 and 32 months, respectively. Elevation of hepatic venous pressure gradient by >4 mm Hg from baseline and an absolute increase to >16 mm Hg immediately post-procedure significantly predicted the development of early- and late-onset ascites, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: Close monitoring for the development of infections and optimization of beta-blockers and diuretics after shunt embolization may improve clinical outcomes and help identify patients who will benefit from liver transplantation pending prospective validation.

BACKGROUND: Severe alcohol-associated hepatitis (SAH) presenting as acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) has high mortality. Severe hepatic inflammation and ongoing hepatocellular cell death lead to rapid rise in portal pressure, a hyperdynamic circulation that might precipitate infections and organ failures.
METHODS: Consecutive SAH patients were classified based on baseline HVPG measurement as 6to < 12 mmHg, 12to < 20 mmHg, and ≥ 20 mmHg. We analyzed portal hypertension severity in relation to fibrosis stage, ACLF at presentation, response to prednisolone, severity scores(MELD and Maddrey\'s Discriminant Function, mDF), and 90-day mortality.
RESULTS: Of 819 SAH patients (94.6% ACLF, 85.4% histological cirrhosis, median MELD and mDF scores 25 and 66, respectively), 250(30.5%) had HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg. Patients with HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg more often had large esophageal varices (25.2%vs.13.2%; p-0.001), higher baseline MELD (27.1 ± 5.6vs.25.3 ± 5.2; p-0.001), and mDF(76.1 ± 16vs.68.4 ± 15.1; p-0.01) scores. No patient without ACLF had HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg. Moreover, during hospital course these patients had higher incidence of variceal bleed (17.2%vs.8.8%; p-0.001), acute kidney injury (36.4%vs.25.3%; p-0.001), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (6.4%vs.3.5%; p-0.05). Of 412(50.3%) eligible patients treated with prednisolone, 69.2% showed response at day 7(Lille\'s score < 0.45). 90-day mortality was 27.6%; and baseline MELD > 25.5[HR 1.78], HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg [HR 1.86], the presence of HE[HR 1.63], and prednisolone ineligibility due to sepsis[HR 1.27] were independent predictors. Mortality was unrelated to varices grade, variceal bleed, and histological cirrhosis. Repeat HVPG performed in 114(19.2%) patients after a median of 5.2 months showed significant decrease (3.6 mmHg; p-0.001) which correlated with improvement in MELD score(13points; p-0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Development of ACLF and complications in SAH are likely a result of acute rise in HVPG. \"High-risk\" SAH are SAH patients with HVPG ≥ 20 mmHg in the presence of ascites. Understanding the drivers for acute rise in portal pressure in SAH ACLF might help introduction of newer therapies.