Cirrhosis Liver

POCUS-Guided AKI Management in Cirrhosis: Hepatology | July 2026

Introduction: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a frequent and life-threatening complication of cirrhosis, with management often complicated by inaccurate assessment of intravascular volume and the presence of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM). This prospective study evaluated whether point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS)–guided volume management improves AKI outcomes and examined the prognostic impact of CCM on renal recovery, need for renal replacement therapy (RRT), and survival. Why was this study needed? . Volume assessment in cirrhosis is often unreliable using clinical examination alone. . Inappropriate fluid management can worsen AKI or precipitate volume overload. . The impact of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy on AKI recovery and long-term outcomes remains poorly defined. . POCUS offers real-time bedside assessment of cardiac function and volume status but lacks robust prospective outcome data. Results: Among 372 ICU patients with cirrhosis and AKI, nearly 80% were initially hypovolemic. Serial POCUS-guided assessment enabled individualized fluid management, with pre-renal AKI identified in 62% of patients, while HRS-AKI accounted for 16%. Cirrhotic cardiomyopathy was present in 35% overall but was markedly more common in HRS-AKI (75%). Higher baseline mean arterial pressure and cardiac index independently predicted AKI reversal within 7 days. Only 14% required renal replacement therapy, while pulmonary edema occurred in fewer than 5% despite active volume resuscitation. Importantly, CCM emerged as a strong independent predictor of both 90-day and 1-year mortality, and lower cardiac index and impaired diastolic function (reduced septal e′ velocity) independently predicted the need for RRT. Clinical Impact: This study supports incorporating POCUS into routine bedside management of cirrhotic patients with AKI to optimize volume resuscitation while minimizing fluid-related complications. Assessment for CCM should become part of AKI evaluation, as underlying cardiac dysfunction identifies patients at high risk for persistent renal failure, dialysis requirement, and death. Early recognition may facilitate more individualized hemodynamic management and prognostic stratification. Bottom Line: POCUS-guided volume management improves individualized treatment of AKI in cirrhosis, while cirrhotic cardiomyopathy is a major predictor of renal non-recovery, dialysis requirement, and short- and long-term mortality.

A Novel Pro-Resolving Target (Annexin A1) for ACLF: Hepatology | May 2026

Introduction: Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is characterized by overwhelming systemic inflammation and immune dysregulation, leading to high short-term mortality. This study used advanced single-cell and spatial transcriptomic technologies to define the immune landscape of ACLF and identify new therapeutic targets for resolving liver inflammation. Why was this study needed? ACLF remains associated with extremely high mortality and limited effective therapies. The immune mechanisms driving persistent liver inflammation are incompletely understood. Identifying pathways that promote resolution of inflammation may offer new therapeutic strategies. High-resolution immune profiling can uncover novel cellular interactions in ACLF. Targeted immunomodulation is urgently needed to improve patient outcomes. Results: ACLF demonstrated a unique inflammatory immune signature, characterized by expansion of inflammatory neutrophils and monocytes, loss of resident Kupffer cells, and profound dysfunction of innate and adaptive immunity. The Annexin A1 (ANXA1)–FPR1 signaling pathway emerged as a key endogenous mechanism limiting excessive inflammation, with ANXA1 levels correlating with disease severity. Treatment with the ANXA1-derived peptide (Ac2-26) significantly reduced liver inflammation, improved liver function, and shifted macrophages from a pro-inflammatory (M1) to a pro-resolving (M2) phenotype in preclinical models. Clinical Impact: This study provides one of the most comprehensive immune maps of ACLF to date and identifies Annexin A1 as a promising pro-resolving therapeutic target. Rather than broadly suppressing immunity, therapies enhancing inflammation resolution may represent a new treatment paradigm for ACLF. Bottom Line: ACLF is driven by profound immune dysregulation rather than inflammation alone. Enhancing the ANXA1–FPR1 pathway promotes resolution of liver inflammation and represents a promising next-generation therapeutic strategy for acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Distal Esophageal Varices in Fontan Circulation: Hepatology | May 2026

Introduction: Adults with Fontan-type circulation are increasingly recognized to develop Fontan-associated liver disease and portal hypertension. This prospective study explored the prevalence, anatomical distribution, and hemodynamic characteristics of esophageal varices (EV), with particular emphasis on distal versus proximal varices. Why was this study needed? Fontan-associated liver disease is becoming a major long-term complication in adult survivors. The mechanisms underlying esophageal varices in Fontan circulation remain poorly understood. The clinical significance of proximal versus distal varices has not been clearly defined. Better risk stratification is needed to optimize surveillance and management. The relationship between portal hypertension, hepatic fibrosis, and Fontan hemodynamics requires clarification. Results: Esophageal varices were present in over one-third of adults with Fontan circulation, with distal varices being the most common subtype. Distal esophageal varices identified a unique high-risk phenotype, characterized by elevated Fontan pressures, portal hypertension, severe hepatic fibrosis, and a hyperdynamic circulatory state. Despite advanced liver disease, variceal bleeding was uncommon, suggesting that variceal location may provide greater prognostic value than bleeding risk alone. Clinical Impact: This study demonstrates that distal esophageal varices are not simply an endoscopic finding but a marker of advanced Fontan-associated liver disease and severe hemodynamic impairment. Their presence should prompt comprehensive evaluation for portal hypertension and hepatic fibrosis, potentially improving long-term surveillance and multidisciplinary management. Bottom Line: Distal esophageal varices define a distinct hemodynamic and hepatic phenotype in patients with Fontan circulation. They serve as an important marker of advanced Fontan-associated liver disease, portal hypertension, and severe fibrosis, warranting closer clinical monitoring.

Annexin A1-A Novel Pro-Resolving Target for ACLF: Hepatology | May 2026

Introduction: Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is characterized by overwhelming systemic inflammation and immune dysregulation, leading to high short-term mortality. This study used advanced single-cell and spatial transcriptomic technologies to define the immune landscape of ACLF and identify new therapeutic targets for resolving liver inflammation. Why was this study needed? ACLF remains associated with extremely high mortality and limited effective therapies. The immune mechanisms driving persistent liver inflammation are incompletely understood. Identifying pathways that promote resolution of inflammation may offer new therapeutic strategies. High-resolution immune profiling can uncover novel cellular interactions in ACLF. Targeted immunomodulation is urgently needed to improve patient outcomes. Results: ACLF demonstrated a unique inflammatory immune signature, characterized by expansion of inflammatory neutrophils and monocytes, loss of resident Kupffer cells, and profound dysfunction of innate and adaptive immunity. The Annexin A1 (ANXA1)–FPR1 signaling pathway emerged as a key endogenous mechanism limiting excessive inflammation, with ANXA1 levels correlating with disease severity. Treatment with the ANXA1-derived peptide (Ac2-26) significantly reduced liver inflammation, improved liver function, and shifted macrophages from a pro-inflammatory (M1) to a pro-resolving (M2) phenotype in preclinical models. Clinical Impact: This study provides one of the most comprehensive immune maps of ACLF to date and identifies Annexin A1 as a promising pro-resolving therapeutic target. Rather than broadly suppressing immunity, therapies enhancing inflammation resolution may represent a new treatment paradigm for ACLF. Bottom Line: ACLF is driven by profound immune dysregulation rather than inflammation alone. Enhancing the ANXA1–FPR1 pathway promotes resolution of liver inflammation and represents a promising next-generation therapeutic strategy for acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Simvastatin Improves Survival After Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhosis: AJG | July 2026

Introduction: Despite advances in the management of portal hypertension, mortality after variceal bleeding remains high in patients with cirrhosis. Experimental and clinical studies suggest that statins may improve portal hypertension and hepatic vascular function. This randomized trial evaluated whether adding simvastatin to standard therapy improves long-term outcomes after variceal bleeding. Why was this study needed? Mortality remains high after acute variceal bleeding despite standard therapy. Evidence supporting statin use in decompensated cirrhosis is limited. Statins may improve portal hypertension and hepatic microcirculation beyond lipid lowering. Their long-term safety in cirrhosis remains uncertain. Randomized data evaluating survival benefit are lacking. Results: Adding simvastatin to standard therapy significantly reduced all-cause mortality over 24 months compared with standard care alone. Simvastatin also reduced the development of new or refractory ascites and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, while rates of rebleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, and acute-on-chronic liver failure were similar between groups. Serious adverse events were not increased, supporting the safety of low-dose simvastatin in appropriately selected patients with cirrhosis. Clinical Impact: This study provides important evidence that simvastatin may offer disease-modifying benefits in cirrhosis, extending beyond cholesterol reduction. When added to carvedilol and endoscopic band ligation, simvastatin improved survival without compromising safety, suggesting a potential role in secondary prophylaxis after variceal bleeding. Bottom Line: Low-dose simvastatin improved long-term survival after variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis while reducing ascites-related complications without increasing serious adverse events. Larger multicenter trials are warranted before routine incorporation into clinical practice.

Pre-Emptive CRRT Improves Outcomes in ALF with Cerebral Oedema: AP&T | June 2026

Introduction: Acute liver failure (ALF) complicated by cerebral oedema carries a high risk of early mortality, primarily due to hyperammonemia and intracranial hypertension. The optimal timing of continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) in these critically ill patients has remained uncertain. Why was this study needed?: Conventional CRRT is often initiated only after significant metabolic deterioration. Whether earlier (pre-emptive) initiation of CRRT, combined with plasma exchange, could improve survival and neurological outcomes had not been established. What did the study show?: This randomised controlled pilot trial compared pre-emptive CRRT plus plasma exchange with standard CRRT initiation in patients with ALF and cerebral oedema. Early CRRT significantly reduced 7-day mortality, accelerated ammonia clearance, improved markers of cerebral oedema, enhanced hemodynamic stability and SOFA scores, and reduced systemic inflammation. Importantly, each hour of delay in CRRT initiation was associated with worse clinical outcomes. Clinical Impact: These findings support a proactive strategy of initiating CRRT early rather than waiting for clinical deterioration. Early ammonia control and reduction of cerebral oedema may provide a crucial bridge to native liver recovery or liver transplantation while improving short-term survival. Take-Home Message: In patients with acute liver failure and cerebral oedema, pre-emptive initiation of CRRT combined with plasma exchange appears to improve early survival and organ function. Early intervention, rather than delayed rescue therapy, may become an important principle in the critical care management of ALF.

Inpatient Management of Hepatic Encephalopathy : Hepatology | June 2026

Introduction: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a major cause of hospitalization in patients with advanced liver disease and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and healthcare utilization. The management of HE extends beyond ammonia reduction and requires a comprehensive strategy addressing precipitating factors, nutritional support, organ dysfunction, and disease-specific complications. Importantly, the approach varies according to the underlying clinical context, including decompensated cirrhosis, acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), and acute liver failure (ALF). Problem Statement: Patients admitted with overt HE often present with multiple concurrent complications that contribute to neurological deterioration. Failure to identify reversible precipitants or recognize syndrome-specific management requirements can adversely affect outcomes. In particular, HE associated with ACLF and ALF presents unique challenges due to multiorgan failure, cerebral edema, and the potential need for emergency liver transplantation. Summary: This review provides a comprehensive overview of the inpatient management of HE across different clinical scenarios. In patients with decompensated cirrhosis, management begins with exclusion of alternative causes of altered mental status, followed by prompt identification and correction of precipitating factors such as infection, gastrointestinal bleeding, electrolyte disturbances, constipation, and renal dysfunction. Nutritional optimization and pharmacological therapies aimed at reducing ammonia production remain central components of care. In ACLF, HE often occurs in conjunction with other organ failures and frequently necessitates intensive care management. Treatment focuses on aggressive management of precipitating events, organ support, and consideration of emergency liver transplantation in carefully selected candidates. The review highlights that ALF represents a distinct clinical entity in which rapidly rising ammonia levels may lead to cerebral edema and intracranial hypertension. Consequently, management includes specialized neuroprotective strategies, close neurological monitoring, osmotic therapy for intracranial pressure control, and extracorporeal ammonia-lowering approaches such as continuous renal replacement therapy and therapeutic plasma exchange. Across all etiologies, patients with grade 3–4 HE require intensive care monitoring because of the high risk of airway compromise and aspiration. The review reinforces the importance of individualized, syndrome-specific management pathways to optimize outcomes in hospitalized patients with HE.

A Practical Diagnostic Framework for Hepatic Encephalopathy : Hepatology | June 2026

Introduction: Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is one of the most common and debilitating neuropsychiatric complications of liver disease and portal-systemic shunting. It can present with a broad spectrum of manifestations, ranging from subtle cognitive impairment to profound coma, significantly affecting quality of life, healthcare utilization, and survival. Although ammonia plays a central role in its pathogenesis, growing evidence supports a multifactorial process involving gut-derived inflammation, infection, and neuroinflammatory pathways. Problem Statement: Diagnosing HE remains challenging because there is no single definitive diagnostic test. Patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension are also susceptible to numerous alternative causes of altered mental status, many of which are potentially reversible and require urgent treatment. Consequently, HE remains a diagnosis of exclusion, demanding a structured and systematic clinical approach to avoid misdiagnosis and delayed management. Summary: This review provides a practical framework for the diagnosis of HE in both acute and outpatient settings. The authors emphasize that accurate diagnosis begins with confirmation of the underlying liver disease or portal-systemic shunting capable of causing HE. Clinical characterization is then essential, recognizing the diverse cognitive, behavioral, neurological, and consciousness-related manifestations that may occur. The review highlights the importance of actively searching for precipitating factors, including infection, gastrointestinal bleeding, constipation, dehydration, electrolyte disturbances, renal dysfunction, and medication-related triggers, as correction of these factors often leads to clinical improvement. Equally important is the systematic exclusion of alternative neurological, metabolic, infectious, psychiatric, and toxicological causes of altered mental status. The authors propose a practical four-step diagnostic approach: defining the underlying disease, characterizing the clinical syndrome, identifying precipitants and risk factors, and excluding competing diagnoses. For patients with subtle cognitive dysfunction, the review also discusses the role of neuropsychological and neurophysiological testing in the diagnosis of covert HE. This structured approach provides clinicians with a clinically relevant roadmap for diagnosing HE, ensuring timely recognition while minimizing the risk of overlooking other potentially treatable conditions.

No Safe Protective Level of Alcohol Identified : JSAD | Jun 2026

Introduction: The belief that low or moderate alcohol consumption may confer cardiovascular or overall health benefits has influenced public health messaging for decades. However, emerging evidence has increasingly challenged this concept, particularly as improved analytical methods have addressed biases present in earlier observational studies. Given alcohol’s established association with liver disease, gastrointestinal cancers, cardiovascular disorders, and injury-related harm, a more comprehensive assessment of its lifetime health impact is needed. Problem Statement: Current alcohol consumption guidelines in several countries continue to permit moderate drinking based partly on the assumption that low levels of alcohol may offer health benefits. However, uncertainty remains regarding whether any level of alcohol consumption provides a net protective effect when both mortality and morbidity risks are considered across an individual’s lifetime. Summary: The Alcohol Intake and Health Study provides a comprehensive evaluation of the lifetime health risks associated with alcohol consumption in the United States. Using national exposure, mortality, and morbidity data, the investigators found no evidence of a net protective health effect at low levels of alcohol intake. Instead, alcohol consumption was associated with progressively increasing risks of death and disease beginning at relatively modest levels of use. Importantly, risks were not confined to heavy drinking but extended into ranges commonly perceived as moderate consumption. The study also demonstrated that drinking patterns matter; consuming multiple drinks on a single occasion further amplified risks of cancer, cardiovascular disease, and injury. These findings challenge the longstanding perception that moderate alcohol intake may be beneficial and support a shift toward more conservative alcohol recommendations. From a gastroenterology and hepatology perspective, the results are particularly relevant given alcohol’s central role in liver disease, gastrointestinal malignancies, and pancreatitis. The authors conclude that public health guidance should emphasize risk reduction rather than potential benefits and support limiting alcohol intake to no more than one drink per day for adults who choose to consume alcohol. Overall, the study strengthens the growing body of evidence that lower alcohol consumption is associated with better long-term health outcomes.

CKD Worsens Outcomes in Cirrhosis Worldwide : Gut | June 2026

Introduction: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is increasingly recognized as a major comorbidity in patients with cirrhosis. The growing global burden of metabolic syndrome, obesity, and diabetes has contributed to a rising prevalence of both liver and kidney disease. In patients with cirrhosis, impaired renal function can complicate management, increase susceptibility to acute kidney injury (AKI), and adversely affect survival. However, data describing the global burden and clinical impact of CKD in cirrhosis have been limited. Problem Statement: Although CKD is known to influence outcomes in advanced liver disease, its prevalence across different regions of the world and its contribution to complications and mortality in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis remain incompletely understood. Identifying the burden of CKD and its clinical consequences is essential for improving risk stratification and patient management. Summary: This large international study from the Chronic Liver Disease Evolution and Registry for Events and Decompensation consortium evaluated more than 7,000 hospitalized patients with cirrhosis across 127 centers worldwide. The investigators found that nearly one in five patients had underlying CKD, highlighting the substantial global burden of renal dysfunction in cirrhosis. The prevalence was highest in high-income countries, reflecting the greater burden of metabolic syndrome and related risk factors in these regions. Patients with CKD presented with more advanced and complicated liver disease, including a higher frequency of ascites and other manifestations of decompensation. Importantly, they were significantly more likely to develop AKI during hospitalization, emphasizing the vulnerability of this population to further renal deterioration. CKD was also associated with substantially worse short-term outcomes, including increased in-hospital and post-discharge mortality. These findings establish CKD as a major determinant of prognosis in cirrhosis and reinforce the need for early identification and proactive management of renal dysfunction. Optimizing ascites control, addressing metabolic risk factors, and implementing strategies to prevent kidney injury may play a critical role in improving outcomes for patients with cirrhosis worldwide.

Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis: Evolving Risk Stratification and Emerging Therapies: Clinics in Liver Disease | June 2026

* Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) remains one of the leading indications for liver transplantation despite being a relatively rare disease. * The incidence and prevalence of PSC continue to rise in Europe and North America, suggesting factors beyond inflammatory bowel disease alone contribute to disease development. * Approximately 60%–80% of patients with PSC develop inflammatory bowel disease, most commonly ulcerative colitis, while 5%–21% of IBD patients develop biliary abnormalities. * PSC-associated IBD differs from classical ulcerative colitis, often demonstrating extensive pancolitis with prominent right-sided involvement and a higher colorectal cancer risk. * Most patients are asymptomatic at diagnosis, with PSC often detected incidentally through abnormal cholestatic liver biochemistry during IBD surveillance. * Young patients frequently present with elevated transaminases and may initially resemble autoimmune hepatitis before evolving into classical PSC. * The natural history of PSC is highly variable, ranging from stable disease over decades to rapid progression requiring transplantation. * Women generally experience a more favorable clinical course, while younger age at diagnosis is associated with a greater burden of PSC-related complications over time. * Hepatopancreatobiliary malignancies remain a major cause of mortality in PSC. * PSC substantially increases the risk of: * Cholangiocarcinoma * Hepatocellular carcinoma * Gallbladder cancer * Pancreatic cancer * PSC-associated IBD also carries a markedly increased risk of colorectal neoplasia, necessitating intensive colonoscopic surveillance. * Risk stratification is rapidly evolving with advances in: * MRI and MRCP imaging * Liver stiffness measurement * Serum biomarkers * Fibrosis assessment tools * Emerging molecular markers * No single risk model currently captures the full complexity of PSC, and multimodal approaches are increasingly favored. * There remains no approved disease-modifying therapy proven to improve transplant-free survival. * Management currently focuses on: * Monitoring disease progression * Managing dominant strictures * Cancer surveillance * Optimizing IBD control * Timely transplant referral * Ursodeoxycholic acid remains widely used in selected patients, although its role continues to be debated. * Several promising therapeutic strategies are under investigation, including: * Norursodeoxycholic acid (norUDCA) * Bile acid receptor modulators * Antifibrotic therapies * Microbiome-targeted approaches * Immune-modulating therapies * Increasing evidence suggests that intestinal inflammation may directly influence PSC progression, reinforcing the importance of achieving deep IBD control. * Future PSC management is expected to move toward precision medicine with individualized risk prediction and targeted therapeutic approaches. Bottom line: PSC remains a challenging cholestatic liver disease with high risks of transplantation and hepatopancreatobiliary malignancy. Advances in imaging, biomarkers, and emerging therapies are improving risk stratification, but effective disease-modifying treatment remains the major unmet need.

Denosumab Shows Safer Osteoporosis Control in PBC : Hepatology Communications | Nov 2025

Introduction Primary Biliary Cholangitis is frequently complicated by osteoporosis due to chronic cholestasis, systemic inflammation, malabsorption and altered bone metabolism. Skeletal fragility substantially increases morbidity in PBC, yet evidence-based treatment strategies specific to this population remain limited. Problem Statement Although bisphosphonates are commonly used in cholestatic liver disease–associated osteoporosis, comparative prospective data evaluating newer antiresorptive therapies in patients with PBC are scarce. Summary The multicenter DELTA trial directly compared Denosumab with Zoledronic Acid in Japanese patients with PBC-associated osteoporosis. This randomized open-label study demonstrated that denosumab achieved non-inferior improvement in lumbar spine bone mineral density compared with zoledronic acid over 12 months. Lumbar spine BMD increased substantially in both treatment groups, confirming the effectiveness of antiresorptive therapy in this high-risk population. Notably, denosumab showed numerically greater improvement in total hip BMD, suggesting potentially stronger effects at cortical bone sites, although predefined statistical non-inferiority criteria were not fully met for this endpoint. Both therapies significantly reduced bone turnover markers and improved biochemical indicators of bone remodeling, reflecting effective suppression of osteoclastic activity. A particularly important finding was the superior tolerability profile of denosumab. Adverse events occurred substantially less frequently compared with zoledronic acid, highlighting a clinically meaningful safety advantage in patients with chronic liver disease who often have multiple comorbidities and frailty. These results are highly relevant because osteoporosis management in PBC differs mechanistically from postmenopausal osteoporosis alone. Chronic cholestasis contributes to impaired osteoblast function, vitamin deficiencies, sarcopenia and altered calcium metabolism, creating a complex skeletal phenotype. The study also reinforces the increasingly recognized burden of hepatic osteodystrophy in chronic cholestatic liver disease. Fractures in PBC are associated with significant functional decline, impaired quality of life and increased healthcare utilization. From a practical standpoint, denosumab offers several advantages in PBC populations. Subcutaneous administration every six months may improve adherence compared with intravenous bisphosphonate strategies, particularly in older or frail patients. The findings additionally raise important considerations regarding individualized bone management in chronic liver disease. Patients with renal dysfunction, gastrointestinal intolerance or poor bisphosphonate tolerance may particularly benefit from denosumab-based approaches. Importantly, no major hepatic safety concerns emerged during the study. This is clinically reassuring given the frequent polypharmacy and metabolic vulnerability observed in advanced cholestatic disease. The trial also underscores the need for proactive bone health surveillance in hepatology practice. Osteoporosis remains underdiagnosed and undertreated in PBC despite its major impact on long-term morbidity. Broader implications extend beyond PBC alone. As survival improves across chronic liver diseases, management of extrahepatic complications including sarcopenia, frailty and osteoporosis is becoming increasingly central to comprehensive hepatology care. Nevertheless, several limitations remain. The study was relatively small, limited to a Japanese population and evaluated surrogate bone density outcomes rather than fracture reduction. Longer-term data regarding fracture prevention, durability of response and sequential treatment strategies following denosumab discontinuation will be important for future practice guidance. Overall, the DELTA study supports denosumab as a safe and effective therapeutic option for osteoporosis in patients with PBC, demonstrating robust bone mineral density improvement alongside a favorable tolerability profile compared with zoledronic acid.

Practical Nutrition Strategies Improve Cirrhosis Care : Frontline Gastroenterology | May 2026

Introduction Cirrhosis is increasingly prevalent worldwide and is associated with major metabolic, nutritional and functional derangements. Malnutrition and sarcopenia are highly prevalent across all stages of cirrhosis and substantially contribute to decompensation, hospitalization and mortality. Problem Statement Despite strong evidence supporting nutritional intervention in cirrhosis, practical nutrition management remains inconsistently implemented in routine care, particularly among non-hepatologists who increasingly manage these patients. Summary This practical review provides a clinically focused framework for integrating nutrition into everyday cirrhosis management across compensated and decompensated disease stages. The authors emphasize that nutritional intervention should be viewed as a core therapeutic component rather than supportive adjunctive care. Malnutrition and sarcopenia are strongly associated with hepatic encephalopathy, ascites severity, variceal bleeding, prolonged hospitalization and reduced survival. A central physiologic concept highlighted is the accelerated starvation state observed in cirrhosis. Patients rapidly transition into catabolism during fasting because of impaired hepatic glycogen storage, resulting in increased muscle breakdown and worsening sarcopenia. To counter this metabolic shift, the review strongly advocates frequent meal intake with three to five meals daily alongside a late evening carbohydrate-protein snack. Avoidance of prolonged fasting is presented as a key practical intervention to preserve muscle mass and metabolic stability. Importantly, the article reinforces that protein restriction should generally be avoided. Contrary to historical practice, high-protein intake is now recognized as protective against Hepatic Encephalopathy and essential for maintaining skeletal muscle ammonia metabolism. The review additionally highlights the importance of routine sarcopenia assessment, recognizing skeletal muscle dysfunction as a major prognostic determinant in cirrhosis. Muscle depletion increasingly functions as both a metabolic and immunologic vulnerability factor in advanced liver disease. Micronutrient deficiency screening is another major practical focus. Deficiencies involving vitamin D, zinc, thiamine and other nutrients are common and frequently underrecognized, particularly in alcohol-related liver disease and advanced decompensation. The article also provides nuanced guidance regarding sodium restriction in ascites management. While low-salt diets remain important, excessive restriction that compromises caloric intake may worsen malnutrition. The authors support individualized dietary liberalization when nutritional intake becomes inadequate, provided diuretics are appropriately adjusted. Bone health is emphasized as another neglected aspect of cirrhosis care. Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are common yet often overlooked complications, supporting low-threshold screening and early intervention strategies. A major strength of the review is its practical accessibility for non-specialists. Rather than focusing solely on detailed guideline statements, the article translates nutritional principles into clinically actionable bedside strategies relevant to general physicians, gastroenterologists and multidisciplinary teams. The review also reflects the growing recognition that nutritional status directly influences transplant outcomes, procedural tolerance, infection risk and overall frailty trajectories in cirrhosis. From a broader perspective, the article reinforces the paradigm shift toward holistic metabolic management in chronic liver disease. Nutrition, exercise, frailty assessment and muscle preservation are increasingly central components of modern hepatology practice. Importantly, many of the proposed interventions are low-cost, scalable and immediately implementable, making them particularly valuable in routine clinical settings with limited specialist dietetic access. Overall, this review provides a highly practical framework for nutritional management in cirrhosis, emphasizing early recognition of malnutrition and sarcopenia, avoidance of prolonged fasting, maintenance of adequate protein intake and individualized metabolic support as key strategies to improve patient outcomes.

ISHEN Consensus Standardizes Ammonia Testing in Cirrhosis : J Hepatol | May 2026

Introduction Hepatic Encephalopathy is a major complication of Cirrhosis and is closely linked to ammonia metabolism. Despite ammonia’s central pathogenic role, the clinical value of blood ammonia measurement has remained controversial because of inconsistent sampling methods, laboratory variability and uncertainty regarding interpretation in routine practice. Problem Statement Lack of standardized guidance regarding ammonia measurement has resulted in major variability in clinical practice, limiting its reliable use in diagnosis, prognostication, therapeutic monitoring and research in cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy. Summary This International Society for Hepatic Encephalopathy and Nitrogen Metabolism (ISHEN) consensus represents the first structured international effort to standardize the role of ammonia measurement in cirrhosis care using a formal evidence-based Delphi methodology. The recommendations were developed through a rigorous multinational multidisciplinary consensus process involving expert hepatologists and researchers with specific expertise in hepatic encephalopathy and ammonia metabolism. The panel addressed 25 clinically relevant PICO questions spanning diagnostic utility, prognostication, therapeutic monitoring and technical aspects of ammonia measurement. A major contribution of the document is its emphasis on preanalytical standardization. The consensus highlights that ammonia measurements are highly susceptible to methodological error, including delays in processing, improper sample handling and variability in collection techniques. Standardized acquisition and processing protocols are therefore essential for clinically interpretable results. The panel supports the clinical relevance of ammonia measurement in selected settings rather than indiscriminate routine use. Elevated ammonia levels were recognized as useful in supporting the diagnosis of overt hepatic encephalopathy, particularly when diagnostic uncertainty exists, while acknowledging that ammonia alone cannot definitively establish or exclude the diagnosis. Importantly, the consensus also emphasizes ammonia’s prognostic role. Elevated levels may help identify patients at higher risk of developing overt hepatic encephalopathy and other liver-related complications, supporting incorporation into risk stratification frameworks for both inpatient and outpatient management. The recommendations additionally address therapeutic monitoring. Serial ammonia assessment may provide supportive information regarding response to ammonia-lowering therapies, although clinical evaluation remains the cornerstone of management decisions. A particularly valuable aspect of the document is its balanced interpretation of ammonia biology. The panel acknowledges that hepatic encephalopathy is multifactorial and not solely ammonia-dependent, explaining why some patients with elevated ammonia remain clinically asymptomatic while others develop encephalopathy despite lower concentrations. The consensus also identifies several important research priorities. These include development of reliable point-of-care ammonia testing, validation of ammonia-based predictive models and improved understanding of non-hyperammonemic encephalopathy phenotypes. Clinically, the document may substantially improve harmonization of practice across centers and trials. Standardized ammonia measurement protocols are especially important for multicenter hepatic encephalopathy studies, biomarker development and emerging therapeutic trials targeting ammonia metabolism. The work additionally reinforces the growing movement toward precision phenotyping in cirrhosis. Rather than viewing ammonia as a binary diagnostic marker, the consensus frames ammonia as a dynamic biologic variable integrated within broader clinical, inflammatory and metabolic contexts. From a translational perspective, the document is also highly relevant for drug development. Reliable ammonia measurement frameworks will likely become increasingly important as novel therapies targeting nitrogen metabolism, microbiome modulation and skeletal muscle ammonia handling continue to emerge. Overall, this ISHEN Delphi consensus establishes the first evidence-based international framework for ammonia measurement in cirrhosis. The recommendations provide practical guidance for clinicians, standardize best practices for sampling and interpretation, and reinforce ammonia’s evolving role in diagnosis, risk stratification and management of hepatic encephalopathy.

Impaired VO₂ Recovery Highlights Frailty Physiology in Cirrhosis : Liver Transpl | May 2026

Introduction Frailty and reduced functional capacity are increasingly recognized as major prognostic determinants in patients with Cirrhosis awaiting Liver Transplantation. The Six-Minute Walk Test is widely used to assess exercise tolerance and frailty in cirrhosis, yet the physiologic mechanisms underlying impaired performance remain incompletely characterized. Understanding cardiovascular, metabolic and muscular responses during functional testing may help refine prehabilitation strategies and exercise prescription in transplant candidates. Problem Statement Although patients with cirrhosis demonstrate markedly reduced aerobic capacity, the dynamic physiologic abnormalities during exercise and recovery that contribute to impaired functional performance are poorly understood, particularly among frail and pre-frail transplant candidates. Summary This physiologic study evaluated real-time cardiopulmonary and skeletal muscle responses during six-minute walk testing in frail/pre-frail cirrhotic patients awaiting transplantation compared with age-matched controls. Investigators continuously measured heart rate, oxygen consumption and calf muscle oxygenation before, during and after exercise using portable metabolic monitoring and near-infrared spectroscopy. Patients with cirrhosis demonstrated profound impairment in functional capacity, walking substantially shorter distances than controls during the six-minute walk test. At baseline, cirrhotic participants already exhibited elevated resting heart rates and reduced calf muscle oxygenation, suggesting underlying circulatory and peripheral tissue abnormalities even before exertion began. During exercise, patients with cirrhosis displayed blunted physiologic responses characterized by lower peak heart rate, reduced oxygen consumption and diminished tissue deoxygenation compared with controls. These findings suggest impaired aerobic reserve and reduced skeletal muscle oxygen extraction during exertion, likely reflecting the combined effects of sarcopenia, mitochondrial dysfunction, autonomic dysregulation and cirrhotic cardiomyopathy. One of the most important observations involved delayed recovery kinetics after exercise. Although heart rate and muscle oxygenation recovery were relatively preserved, recovery of oxygen consumption remained significantly prolonged in cirrhotic patients. This delayed VO₂ recovery likely reflects impaired oxidative metabolism and delayed restoration of aerobic homeostasis following exertion. The physiologic pattern observed resembles impaired metabolic flexibility seen in advanced heart failure and severe frailty syndromes. Reduced mitochondrial efficiency, skeletal muscle dysfunction and altered peripheral oxygen utilization may collectively contribute to the slowed recovery phenotype identified in these transplant candidates. Clinically, the findings provide mechanistic support for structured prehabilitation programs in cirrhosis. Importantly, the study suggests that exercise training protocols may need modification in this population, particularly by incorporating longer recovery intervals between exercise bouts because of delayed oxygen consumption normalization. The work also reinforces that frailty in cirrhosis is not simply deconditioning but rather a complex multisystem physiologic disorder involving cardiovascular, muscular and metabolic impairment. Functional limitation appears to arise not only from reduced exercise tolerance itself but also from impaired post-exercise recovery dynamics. These findings may have important implications for transplant assessment and longitudinal frailty monitoring. Recovery physiology — particularly delayed VO₂ normalization — may eventually emerge as a more sensitive marker of physiologic reserve than walk distance alone. Overall, this study demonstrates that frail/pre-frail cirrhotic patients awaiting transplantation exhibit markedly impaired aerobic endurance and delayed metabolic recovery after exercise. The findings strengthen the rationale for individualized prehabilitation strategies and suggest that recovery kinetics may represent an important physiologic target in exercise-based interventions for advanced liver disease.

Wilson Disease Remains a Single-Gene Disorder : JHEP Reports | May 2026

Introduction Wilson disease (WD) is an autosomal recessive copper metabolism disorder caused by pathogenic variants in the ATP7B gene. Although genetic confirmation is increasingly incorporated into diagnostic algorithms, up to 20% of clinically diagnosed patients in historical cohorts remained genetically unresolved despite strong clinical evidence of WD. This multicenter international study evaluated whether modern genomic and functional approaches could clarify the molecular basis of these unresolved cases and determine whether WD truly represents a single-gene disorder. Problem Statement Conventional sequencing strategies, including hotspot analysis and Sanger sequencing, frequently fail to identify all pathogenic ATP7B variants. This diagnostic gap has generated speculation regarding alternative genetic causes, modifier genes or genetically heterogeneous Wilson-like syndromes. Uncertainty in unresolved cases complicates diagnostic confidence, family screening and genetic counselling, particularly when clinical Leipzig scores strongly support WD despite incomplete molecular confirmation. Summary This international multicenter study analyzed 761 clinically confirmed WD patients from tertiary referral centers in Germany, USA, Spain and Denmark. Among the cohort, only 44 patients (5.8%) had zero or one previously identified pathogenic ATP7B variant despite definite clinical WD. A comprehensive five-step diagnostic strategy incorporating whole genome sequencing (WGS), expanded gene panel analysis, long-read sequencing and ATP7B peptide quantification was applied to these unresolved cases. Reanalysis of ATP7B alone resolved 52% of previously unexplained cases. Seven patients were solved through reinterpretation of previously reported variants of uncertain significance, while 16 additional patients were diagnosed after WGS identified previously undetected ATP7B variants, including intronic, structural and complex rearrangements missed by earlier sequencing methodologies. Overall, 11 novel ATP7B variants were identified. Functional ATP7B peptide analysis further confirmed protein dysfunction in additional unresolved patients, increasing the diagnostic confirmation rate to 66% within the genetically unresolved subgroup and to 98% across the entire WD cohort. Importantly, extensive screening of 97 copper metabolism-related genes and more than 4,300 genes associated with hepatic or neurological disorders failed to identify alternative monogenic causes of disease. Even advanced long-read sequencing approaches did not reveal non-ATP7B pathogenic mechanisms. These findings strongly reinforce the concept that WD is fundamentally a single-gene disorder caused by ATP7B dysfunction rather than a genetically heterogeneous syndrome. The study has major clinical implications. It demonstrates that many historically “genetically negative” WD cases reflect limitations of older sequencing technologies or outdated variant classification rather than alternative disease biology. The authors advocate routine re-evaluation of unresolved WD cases using contemporary WGS, comprehensive ATP7B analysis and functional peptide assays before considering alternative diagnoses. This strategy can substantially improve diagnostic certainty, cascade family testing and personalized clinical management in WD.

Tacrolimus Shows Promise in Refractory Paediatric AIH : Frontline Gastroenterol | May 2026

Introduction Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) in children is typically managed with corticosteroids and azathioprine, achieving remission in most patients. However, a subset of paediatric patients remain refractory to standard therapy or develop significant treatment intolerance, creating a major therapeutic challenge with risk of progressive fibrosis and liver failure. Problem Statement Evidence supporting second-line immunosuppressive therapy in difficult-to-treat paediatric AIH remains limited, particularly regarding long-term efficacy and safety of tacrolimus. Optimal management strategies for children with incomplete response or intolerance to conventional therapy are not well established. Summary This single-centre retrospective study evaluated tacrolimus as rescue immunosuppression in children with refractory or treatment-intolerant autoimmune hepatitis. Most patients received tacrolimus because of inadequate biochemical response to standard therapy, while a smaller proportion required escalation because of medication intolerance. Notably, many children already demonstrated progression of hepatic fibrosis at the time tacrolimus was initiated, underscoring the aggressive nature of difficult-to-control paediatric AIH. Tacrolimus induced complete biochemical remission in approximately two-thirds of patients, with remission often achieved rapidly after treatment initiation. Importantly, even patients who failed to achieve full remission demonstrated significant biochemical improvement, suggesting clinically meaningful disease control despite persistent low-grade activity. The treatment was well tolerated overall, with no major adverse effects or treatment discontinuations observed during follow-up. These findings support tacrolimus as a viable second-line or third-line immunosuppressive strategy in carefully selected paediatric AIH patients managed within specialized hepatology centres. The study also reinforces the importance of early recognition of treatment-refractory disease, as ongoing inflammatory activity may contribute to progressive fibrosis despite conventional therapy. Although limited by retrospective design and small cohort size, the findings add important real-world evidence supporting calcineurin inhibitor–based rescue therapy in paediatric AIH and highlight the need for prospective multicentre studies to better define long-term outcomes, optimal therapeutic timing and predictors of response.

Delisting for Clinical Improvement Emerges as a Practical Marker of Cirrhosis Recompensation : Liver Transpl | April 2026

Introduction The concept of recompensated cirrhosis has gained increasing importance with the advent of effective disease-modifying therapies for chronic liver disease, including antiviral treatment and sustained alcohol abstinence. As more patients experience meaningful clinical recovery, reassessing transplant candidacy and determining when liver transplantation may no longer be necessary have become major clinical challenges. Problem Statement Although recompensation is increasingly recognized as a relevant therapeutic endpoint, standardized real-world markers for durable clinical improvement remain poorly defined. Delisting for clinical improvement (DCI) from the liver transplant waitlist has been proposed as a potential surrogate for recompensation, but the durability of improvement and risk of subsequent clinical deterioration remain uncertain. Summary This large national cohort study demonstrates that delisting for clinical improvement occurs in a meaningful subset of liver transplant waitlist patients and may serve as a practical surrogate marker for recompensated cirrhosis. Rates of DCI varied substantially according to liver disease etiology, with the highest frequencies observed in hepatitis B, alcohol-associated liver disease and autoimmune hepatitis, reflecting the greater reversibility of these conditions under effective therapy or sustained disease control. Importantly, the study shows that true durable recompensation is not fully captured by MELD improvement alone. Patients achieving both MELD reduction and improvement in Child–Turcotte–Pugh class had the lowest risk of relisting, suggesting that combined biochemical and clinical recovery better defines stable recompensation. Notably, many patients delisted for improvement still retained significant underlying liver dysfunction, as fewer than half normalized to Child–Turcotte–Pugh class A. Relisting remained relatively uncommon overall but was frequently driven by hepatocellular carcinoma, emphasizing the continued oncologic vulnerability of cirrhotic patients despite hepatic improvement. Additional predictors of relapse included hypoalbuminemia, male sex and underlying disease etiology. Overall, the study supports a more nuanced and multidimensional approach to defining recompensated cirrhosis and provides important real-world evidence that integrated clinical improvement metrics may help guide safer liver transplant delisting decisions.

Integrating Portal Hypertension and HCC into a Unified Stage-Based Cirrhosis Model : Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol | May 2026

Introduction Cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represent closely interconnected consequences of chronic liver disease, with portal hypertension serving as a central driver of hepatic decompensation and a major determinant of prognosis. Despite this biologic overlap, clinical management frameworks have traditionally approached portal hypertension and HCC as separate entities. Problem Statement Current guidelines frequently fail to integrate cirrhosis stage, clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) and HCC stage into a unified prognostic model. This separation may lead to suboptimal treatment selection, inaccurate risk stratification and inadequate personalization of therapy, particularly when determining candidacy for curative interventions such as hepatic resection or transplantation. Summary This review proposes a clinically integrated, stage-based framework that combines cirrhosis severity, portal hypertension status and HCC stage to guide prognostication and therapeutic decision-making. The authors emphasize that CSPH represents a critical biologic and clinical milestone in compensated cirrhosis, strongly influencing risk of decompensation, survival and eligibility for curative HCC therapies. Importantly, the review highlights the transition from invasive hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement toward non-invasive assessment using liver stiffness and platelet-based tools, with emerging evidence suggesting these methods may soon become standard even in patients with HCC. The article further argues that management strategies should differ substantially according to the interaction between cirrhosis stage and tumor burden rather than relying on tumor stage alone. In compensated cirrhosis without CSPH, aggressive curative approaches may remain feasible, whereas decompensated disease substantially limits therapeutic tolerance and prognosis independent of tumor stage. The authors also call for future HCC clinical trials to incorporate cirrhosis stage and portal hypertension stratification into study design and outcome analysis. Overall, this review advances an important conceptual shift toward fully integrated hepatology-oncology care, where liver function, portal hypertension and tumor biology are evaluated simultaneously to optimize individualized management in cirrhosis-associated HCC.

Semaglutide Reduces Heavy Drinking in Alcohol Use Disorder with Obesity | The Lancet

Introduction Alcohol use disorder (AUD) remains a major global health challenge with limited pharmacologic treatment options and persistently high relapse rates. Although behavioural therapies remain foundational, currently approved medications offer modest efficacy, creating a substantial need for more effective therapeutic strategies. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), widely used in obesity and diabetes, have emerged as promising candidates owing to their effects on reward signalling, appetite regulation and addictive behaviours. Problem Statement Effective pharmacotherapy for AUD remains limited, particularly in patients with coexisting obesity, a phenotype increasingly recognized to share overlapping neurobiological and metabolic pathways with addictive behaviour. While preclinical and early human data have suggested that GLP-1RAs may reduce alcohol consumption, robust randomized evidence in treatment-seeking patients with clinically significant AUD has been lacking. Summary This randomized, placebo-controlled trial demonstrates that once-weekly semaglutide significantly reduces heavy drinking in treatment-seeking patients with moderate-to-severe AUD and comorbid obesity. Over 26 weeks, semaglutide produced greater reductions in heavy drinking days, total alcohol intake, alcohol craving and WHO drinking risk levels compared with placebo, while also improving several objective alcohol-related biomarkers. These benefits were accompanied by substantial reductions in body weight, waist circumference and glycated hemoglobin, supporting a broader metabolic benefit in this high-risk population. The treatment was generally well tolerated, with predominantly mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal adverse effects consistent with the known safety profile of semaglutide. Importantly, this is the first randomized trial to show clinically meaningful reductions in alcohol consumption with semaglutide in treatment-seeking individuals, supporting GLP-1 receptor agonism as a promising therapeutic strategy for AUD. Although larger and more diverse studies are needed before routine clinical adoption, these findings position semaglutide as a potentially important dual-purpose intervention for patients with coexisting alcohol use disorder and obesity.

PPAR Agonists in PBC: Hepatology | April 2026

Introduction Primary biliary cholangitis is a chronic cholestatic liver disease that can progress to cirrhosis and liver failure if inadequately treated. While ursodeoxycholic acid remains the first-line therapy, a significant proportion of patients have incomplete response or intolerance. In this context, peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor agonists have emerged as promising second-line options, targeting metabolic and inflammatory pathways involved in cholestasis. However, comparative efficacy among different PPAR agents remains unclear due to lack of direct head-to-head trials. Problem Statement There is limited comparative evidence to guide the selection of the most effective and safest PPAR agonist as second-line therapy in PBC. Summary This network meta-analysis of eight randomized trials involving over 700 patients demonstrates that all PPAR agonists are superior to placebo in achieving biochemical response and alkaline phosphatase (ALP) normalization, key surrogate markers of disease control in PBC. Among available agents, bezafibrate ranked highest for overall biochemical response, while both bezafibrate and seladelpar showed the best performance for ALP normalization. Interestingly, the magnitude of ALP reduction was consistent regardless of baseline disease severity, suggesting broad applicability across patient subgroups. Total bilirubin outcomes were similar across treatments, and adverse events leading to discontinuation were infrequent, supporting a favorable safety profile. In the absence of direct comparative trials, this study provides valuable indirect evidence to guide clinical decision-making. However, differences in ranking should be interpreted cautiously due to variability in study design and populations. Clinically, PPAR agonists represent an effective and safe second-line strategy in PBC, with bezafibrate and seladelpar emerging as leading options. Future research should focus on long-term outcomes and patient-centered benefits beyond biochemical response.

Extrahepatic Abdominal Surgery in Cirrhosis: EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines

Surgery in patients with cirrhosis is no longer viewed as uniformly prohibited, but it remains high-risk and must be approached in a structured way. The two most important determinants are the severity of liver disease and the type and urgency of surgery. A compensated patient with preserved liver function may tolerate elective surgery reasonably well, whereas a decompensated patient with significant portal hypertension may deteriorate rapidly after even a technically successful operation. For this reason, these guidelines strongly support multidisciplinary assessment involving hepatology, surgery, anaesthesia, radiology, nutrition, and critical care teams. How Surgical Risk Should Be Assessed The guideline makes it clear that risk assessment should not rely on clinical impression alone. A multimodal approach is preferred. The VOCAL-Penn score is currently the most useful modern surgical risk calculator and should be incorporated into practice. Traditional scores such as Child-Turcotte-Pugh and MELD still remain clinically relevant, especially because much of the existing literature still uses them. Portal hypertension is a major issue because it strongly influences postoperative decompensation, bleeding, ascites, renal injury, and death. Non-invasive tests such as transient elastography and platelet count can help identify compensated advanced chronic liver disease and rule in or rule out clinically significant portal hypertension in selected patients. However, when surgical decision-making depends on accurate haemodynamic risk, hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) remains the most informative tool. The guideline emphasizes that risk rises particularly when HVPG is above 16 mmHg and becomes especially concerning at 20 mmHg or more. Risk According to Severity of Liver Disease Patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis generally represent the group in whom elective surgery can be considered most safely, especially if portal hypertension is absent or limited and the operation can be performed laparoscopically in an experienced centre. This is the subgroup where the concept of “careful surgery after optimization” best applies. Patients with Child-Pugh B cirrhosis fall into an intermediate but clearly increased risk category. Surgery is not automatically ruled out, but the threshold for proceeding should be higher. These patients require detailed assessment of portal hypertension, nutritional status, frailty, cardiopulmonary reserve, and operative necessity. In some selected patients, especially those with significant portal hypertension, preoperative strategies such as TIPS may be considered. Patients with Child-Pugh C cirrhosis have very high perioperative mortality and morbidity. Elective extrahepatic abdominal surgery should generally be avoided in this group. If surgery is required, it is usually because of an emergency or life-saving indication, and even then, outcomes are poor. The guideline is particularly cautious in patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). Once ACLF grade 2 or 3 is present, emergency surgery may often be futile unless the surgical pathology itself is reversible and the patient has a realistic path to recovery or transplantation. Risk According to the Type of Surgery Not all operations carry the same risk. The guideline supports thinking not just in terms of liver function, but also in terms of surgical stress. Gallbladder surgery can be performed in selected cirrhotic patients, especially those with Child-Pugh A or B disease. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is preferred over open surgery because it reduces complications and recovery time. In advanced disease, especially Child-Pugh C, non-surgical approaches such as percutaneous or endoscopic gallbladder drainage may be safer. Hernia surgery is very relevant because umbilical and abdominal wall hernias are common in cirrhosis, particularly with ascites. The guideline supports elective repair in experienced centres after careful optimisation, because emergency surgery for incarceration or rupture carries much worse outcomes. In practical terms, elective repair is often safer than waiting for a crisis. Colorectal surgery carries a substantially higher risk, especially because of infection, leakage, and decompensation. Emergency colorectal surgery is particularly dangerous. If surgery must be performed, minimally invasive approaches are preferred when feasible, and surgeons may need to consider diversion rather than primary anastomosis in high-risk patients. Pancreatic surgery is one of the highest-risk operations in cirrhosis. The guideline allows consideration only in carefully selected Child-Pugh A patients without clinically significant portal hypertension, and only for malignancy or premalignant disease. It should be discouraged in Child-Pugh B or C patients, and it should not be done for benign pancreatic disease. Aortic surgery, particularly for abdominal aortic aneurysm, may be considered in Child-Pugh A patients after careful assessment, but is discouraged in Child-Pugh B and C disease. Endovascular repair is preferred over open repair because it reduces physiological stress. Emergency Surgery and the Concept of Futility The guideline recognises that emergency surgery is often where the greatest uncertainty lies. In compensated cirrhosis, decisions may be made broadly in line with general surgical principles. However, in decompensated cirrhosis, especially with organ failures, a realistic discussion about futility becomes necessary. If surgery is unlikely to achieve the intended physiological goal, or if it may only prolong dying without meaningful recovery, proceeding may not be in the patient’s best interest. This is particularly relevant in advanced ACLF, severe sepsis, refractory shock, and profound physiological collapse. Preoperative Optimization The guideline places major emphasis on optimisation before any elective operation. The cause of liver disease should be treated whenever possible. This means strict alcohol abstinence in alcohol-related disease, antiviral therapy in viral cirrhosis, and broader metabolic treatment in MASLD where relevant. Nutritional status should be assessed in all patients. Malnutrition, sarcopenia, and frailty are common in cirrhosis and meaningfully worsen outcomes. The guideline recommends prehabilitation, ideally starting 4 to 6 weeks before surgery, with physical conditioning, dietary intervention, and psychological preparation when possible. Cardiopulmonary evaluation is also essential. A patient with cirrhosis may also have occult cardiac dysfunction, pulmonary hypertension, or hepatopulmonary syndrome. Electrocardiography, echocardiography, and pulse oximetry should be part of routine workup for major surgery. Upper GI endoscopy is recommended in most patients unless clinically significant portal hypertension has already been excluded or appropriate variceal prophylaxis is already in place. Role of TIPS Before Surgery The guideline does not recommend routine preoperative TIPS for all cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension. In Child-Pugh A patients, evidence is not strong enough to support routine use. In selected Child-Pugh B or C patients with significant portal hypertension, however, preparatory TIPS may be considered by expert teams, particularly if the aim is to reduce postoperative ascites and portal hypertension-related complications. This remains an individualized decision rather than a standard rule. Perioperative Bleeding and Coagulation One of the most clinically useful messages from the guideline is that abnormal coagulation tests in cirrhosis should not automatically trigger correction. INR is not a reliable guide to true bleeding risk in these patients, and routine correction with plasma is not recommended. The haemostatic system in cirrhosis is rebalanced, and bleeding often relates more to portal hypertension or procedural injury than to simple clotting factor deficiency. If active bleeding occurs, viscoelastic testing is preferred to guide transfusion. Platelets and fibrinogen may be corrected selectively in high-risk bleeding situations, but prophylactic transfusion based purely on standard laboratory values is discouraged. Fluid Therapy and Haemodynamic Management Fluid overload should be avoided. This is extremely important in cirrhosis because over-resuscitation worsens ascites, oedema, pulmonary congestion, and wound complications. Balanced crystalloids are generally preferred, and hydroxyethyl starch should be avoided because of kidney injury risk. The anaesthetic and critical care teams must maintain tissue perfusion while avoiding venous congestion and portal pressure excess. Anaesthesia and Analgesia Drug handling is altered in cirrhosis, so anaesthetic and analgesic doses must be adjusted according to hepatic function. Propofol is generally safe, and fentanyl is the preferred opioid because it lacks toxic metabolites and is less affected by hepatic dysfunction than longer-acting opioids. NSAIDs should be avoided because of renal risk and bleeding risk. Paracetamol remains safe in reduced doses, usually up to 2–3 grams daily. Benzodiazepines should be avoided in patients with encephalopathy. Regional techniques may reduce systemic drug exposure, but nerve blocks and especially neuraxial techniques should be used cautiously in more advanced cirrhosis because of bleeding risk. Enhanced Recovery and Postoperative Care The guideline supports enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) principles in cirrhotic patients. These include structured perioperative nutrition, early mobilisation, careful analgesia, minimisation of unnecessary lines and drains, and early enteral feeding. Although data specific to cirrhosis are limited, the principles are strongly supported. Postoperatively, patients require close monitoring for hepatic encephalopathy, ascites, jaundice, renal dysfunction, infection, and bleeding. The guideline suggests that intensive or high-dependency monitoring may be beneficial after major surgery, especially in high-risk patients, because deterioration can occur rapidly and early intervention matters. Practical Clinical Take-Home For a clinician, the most important way to remember this guideline is simple. A cirrhotic patient should never be judged for surgery based only on the label “cirrhosis.” The real questions are: How severe is the liver disease? Is clinically significant portal hypertension present? Is the surgery elective or emergency? Can it be done minimally invasively? Has the patient been optimised nutritionally and medically? And is the procedure being performed in a centre that truly understands cirrhosis? In broad terms, Child-Pugh A patients may undergo selected elective surgery after proper assessment; Child-Pugh B patients require much greater caution and individualised planning; Child-Pugh C and ACLF patients are usually poor surgical candidates unless surgery is life-saving. Minimally invasive approaches are preferred wherever feasible, portal hypertension must be actively considered, and postoperative monitoring should be more vigilant than in non-cirrhotic patients. If you want, I can next convert this into a one-page clinic table with columns for severity of cirrhosis, type of surgery, and practical recommendations

Psychomotor Speed and Frailty in Advanced Liver Disease: AJG | April 2026

Introduction Minimal hepatic encephalopathy (MHE) and physical frailty are highly prevalent yet often under-recognised complications in patients with advanced chronic liver disease (AdvCLD). While MHE reflects subtle neurocognitive impairment, frailty represents systemic physical vulnerability. Traditionally, complex tools like the Psychometric Hepatic Encephalopathy Score have limited routine clinical assessment of MHE. The simpler Stroop EncephalApp (StE) offers a practical alternative, raising interest in understanding how cognitive dysfunction—particularly psychomotor speed—relates to physical frailty. Problem Statement Despite both MHE and frailty being strong predictors of poor outcomes, their interrelationship remains poorly defined. Specifically, it is unclear whether cognitive impairment assessed by simple tools like StE correlates meaningfully with frailty indices and whether this relationship can be used for risk stratification in clinical practice. Summary In this multicenter study of patients awaiting liver transplantation, MHE was present in 73% and frailty in 18%. Patients with MHE had significantly worse Liver Frailty Index (LFI) scores and were more frequently classified as prefrail or frail. A strong correlation was observed between psychomotor speed—particularly StE off-time—and frailty, with LFI independently predicting MHE (OR 2.41). These findings highlight a critical brain–muscle axis in cirrhosis, where impaired psychomotor speed mirrors physical decline. The study supports the use of simple bedside tools like StE to identify high-risk patients and suggests that integrated cognitive and physical interventions may improve outcomes in advanced liver disease.

Oral Health Matters in Cirrhosis: JHEP Reports/ March 2026

Introduction: Cirrhosis is increasingly recognised as a multisystem disease influenced by inflammation, microbiome alterations, and extrahepatic factors. Poor oral health, particularly periodontitis, contributes to systemic inflammation and bacterial translocation through the oral–gut–liver axis. However, whether improving oral hygiene through structured dental prophylactic services can modify the natural history of cirrhosis has remained largely unexplored in large real-world cohorts. Problem Statement and Summary: This large Veterans cohort study demonstrates that regular dental prophylaxis (≥1 visit/year) is independently associated with significantly lower rates of cirrhosis decompensation, including ascites and hepatic encephalopathy, as well as reduced hepatocellular carcinoma incidence and hospitalisations over 2 years. Importantly, this protective effect was specific to dental care and not merely a marker of healthcare engagement, as colonoscopy screening did not show similar benefits. The findings highlight a novel, modifiable and under-recognised factor in cirrhosis management. Clinical Implication: Routine dental care should be integrated into standard cirrhosis management, shifting focus toward holistic care and reinforcing the importance of the oral–liver axis in disease progression.

Recompensation in Decompensated Cirrhosis: CGH/ April 2026

Introduction: Decompensated cirrhosis has traditionally been considered an irreversible stage of liver disease, associated with poor survival and frequent complications such as ascites, variceal bleeding, and hepatic encephalopathy. However, emerging evidence challenges this paradigm, suggesting that effective etiological treatment can lead to “recompensation,” defined as resolution of decompensating events with sustained improvement in liver function. This evolving concept represents a fundamental shift in cirrhosis management, moving from palliation toward potential disease modification. Summary: This systematic review and meta-analysis involving over 9000 patients demonstrates that recompensation occurs in approximately one-third of patients with decompensated cirrhosis, particularly in viral etiologies such as hepatitis B. Importantly, recompensation is associated with significantly lower risks of hepatocellular carcinoma and mortality, highlighting its prognostic and clinical relevance. Despite these promising findings, heterogeneity across studies and limited high-quality evidence indicate that predictors, durability, and mechanisms of recompensation remain incompletely understood. Clinical Implication: Recompensation should be recognised as an achievable and meaningful therapeutic endpoint, emphasising early etiological treatment, aggressive disease modification, and a dynamic approach to cirrhosis care rather than a static irreversible model.

Baclofen vs Acamprosate in Alcohol-Associated Cirrhosis: Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics | March 2026

Introduction Management of alcohol use disorder in patients with cirrhosis remains a clinical challenge, where drug safety is as critical as efficacy. Acamprosate is generally preferred due to renal clearance, while baclofen has been considered safe even in advanced liver disease. However, comparative real-world safety data between these two commonly used agents in compensated alcohol-associated cirrhosis have been limited. Problem Statement Despite guideline endorsement of both baclofen and acamprosate, uncertainty persists regarding their relative hepatic safety. Clinicians often face a dilemma in choosing therapy, particularly in patients at risk of decompensation, where even small differences in adverse outcomes can significantly impact prognosis. Summary This large, multicenter, real-world cohort study using a target trial emulation framework compared baclofen and acamprosate in compensated alcohol-associated cirrhosis. After robust propensity matching, baclofen was associated with a higher incidence of major adverse liver outcomes at one year compared to acamprosate (34.3% vs 27.4%). Notably, the increased risk was primarily driven by a higher incidence of hepatic encephalopathy, while other decompensation events and mortality did not differ significantly. The risk appeared more pronounced in older patients. These findings suggest that while baclofen remains an option, acamprosate may be the safer first-line agent in compensated cirrhosis, particularly in patients at risk for encephalopathy. This study provides important real-world evidence to guide individualised therapeutic decision-making in this vulnerable population.

Early Portopulmonary Hypertension in Cirrhosis: Journal of Hepatology | February 2026

Introduction Portopulmonary hypertension represents a complex cardiopulmonary complication of cirrhosis that significantly impacts prognosis and transplant eligibility. Recent data from the PORTO-DETECT cohort have suggested that even early-stage portopulmonary hypertension, defined using updated hemodynamic criteria, is associated with increased mortality. This has generated considerable interest, particularly regarding whether early disease represents a true biological risk state or simply reflects differences in treatment exposure and detection. Problem Statement The key clinical uncertainty is whether early portopulmonary hypertension independently predicts mortality or whether observed outcomes are confounded by treatment bias, patient selection, and methodological limitations inherent to observational studies. Additionally, it remains unclear whether early detection should alter management, given the lack of evidence supporting early therapeutic intervention and the challenges in implementing invasive screening strategies such as right-heart catheterisation. Summary The association between early portopulmonary hypertension and increased mortality compared to patients with normal hemodynamics, independent of liver disease severity and portal hypertension. Importantly, no patients were on pulmonary vasodilator therapy at baseline, minimising treatment-related confounding in the early disease group. The authors acknowledge that treatment imbalance and observational design limit causal inference but argue that these factors do not fully explain the observed mortality signal. They emphasise that early portopulmonary hypertension should currently be viewed as a prognostic marker rather than an indication for immediate treatment. The findings support closer surveillance and risk stratification rather than therapeutic escalation. Future prospective studies and dedicated trials are needed to determine whether early intervention can improve outcomes and to define optimal screening strategies in patients with cirrhosis.

Post-Banding Ulcer Bleeding After EBL: Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics | March 2026

Introduction Endoscopic band ligation (EBL) remains the standard of care for managing esophageal varices, both in acute variceal bleeding and for prophylaxis. However, post-banding ulcer bleeding (PBUB) is an important and often under-recognized complication, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Identifying patients at higher risk for PBUB is clinically relevant, particularly in acute settings where outcomes are already compromised. Problem Statement Despite increasing recognition of PBUB, risk stratification remains inconsistent in clinical practice. Recent data have suggested that urgent EBL and renal dysfunction may increase PBUB risk, but real-world validation across larger cohorts is limited, and standardized definitions are lacking. Summary In this large real-world analysis of 920 EBL procedures, PBUB occurred in 3.4% overall, with a significantly higher incidence following urgent EBL compared to elective procedures (7.5% vs 1.4%). Urgent EBL emerged as a strong independent predictor of PBUB, reinforcing the vulnerability of patients undergoing intervention during acute bleeding episodes. Additionally, renal dysfunction was identified as a key risk factor, with patients having serum creatinine ≥1.5 mg/dL demonstrating markedly higher bleeding rates and independent risk. These findings are consistent with prior literature and highlight a simple, clinically applicable framework combining urgency of EBL and renal function to identify high-risk patients. This approach may help guide closer monitoring and preventive strategies in routine practice.

Ammonia Measurement in Cirrhosis: Journal of Hepatology| March 2026

Introduction Ammonia has long been recognized as a central neurotoxin in the pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy, but its clinical use in cirrhosis has remained inconsistent because of major variability in sampling, processing, reporting, and interpretation. This international ISHEN Delphi consensus is important because it is the first structured, evidence-based effort to define when ammonia should be measured, how it should be measured, and how clinicians should interpret it in both outpatient and inpatient cirrhosis care. The document moves the field beyond the old debate of whether ammonia is useful at all and instead places ammonia within a practical clinical framework. Summary The consensus makes a strong methodological point that ammonia is only clinically useful when measured properly. It recommends a minimum 4-hour fasting period, venous sampling for routine practice, transport on ice, centrifugation within 15 minutes, and measurement within 2 hours. It also advises that ammonia should be reported both as an absolute value and as a multiple of the upper limit of normal to improve comparability across laboratories. In the outpatient setting, ammonia is positioned as a useful biomarker for risk stratification, especially for predicting overt hepatic encephalopathy, liver-related decompensation, and death, with a level greater than 1.4 times the upper limit of normal emerging as an important prognostic threshold. In patients undergoing elective TIPS, pre-procedure ammonia may help predict post-TIPS encephalopathy. In the inpatient setting, ammonia is not considered a standalone diagnostic test for overt hepatic encephalopathy, but a normal value should prompt clinicians to question the diagnosis and search for alternative causes of altered mental status. The consensus also emphasizes that serial ammonia measurement has value during treatment, because falling ammonia levels are associated with better neurological recovery and improved survival, whereas persistent or rising ammonia suggests poor response and worse prognosis. Conclusion The major clinical message of this ISHEN consensus is that ammonia should no longer be dismissed as an unreliable biomarker, but neither should it be used in isolation. When measured under standardized conditions and interpreted within the full clinical context, ammonia provides meaningful diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic information in cirrhosis. This document is likely to influence day-to-day hepatology practice, future trial design, and global harmonization of care in hepatic encephalopathy.

A-TANGO for ACLF: Journal of Hepatology | February 2026

Introduction Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a severe syndrome characterized by acute decompensation of cirrhosis, multiorgan failure, and high short-term mortality. The current EASL-CLIF criteria have been widely used for diagnosis and prognostication, but they have important limitations, particularly in accurately defining organ failure thresholds and stratifying risk within severe disease categories. With emerging therapies and increasing emphasis on clinical trials in ACLF, there is a growing need for more precise and reproducible scoring systems. This study introduces the A-TANGO organ failure score, developed using large global cohorts to improve diagnosis, risk stratification, and applicability in clinical trials. Summary The A-TANGO score was derived from nearly 4,000 patients across Europe and Latin America and validated in large independent cohorts from India and China, making it one of the most robust global ACLF datasets to date. The score refines organ dysfunction thresholds and introduces a more granular classification, including a new ACLF grade 4 to better capture patients with extremely high mortality risk. Compared with the traditional CLIF-C OF score, A-TANGO identifies a greater number of organ failures and increases ACLF diagnosis rates, thereby improving patient classification. Importantly, despite identifying more patients with ACLF, the score maintains strong predictive accuracy for short-term mortality. The study also introduces two additional prognostic models incorporating inflammatory markers, which further enhance risk prediction. Overall, A-TANGO provides a more sensitive and clinically relevant framework for identifying high-risk patients, guiding management decisions, and defining endpoints in ACLF clinical trials. Conclusion The A-TANGO organ failure score represents a significant advancement in the field of ACLF by improving diagnostic precision without compromising prognostic performance. Its validation across diverse global populations supports its potential as a new standard for both clinical practice and research. By enabling better identification of high-risk patients and providing more reliable endpoints, A-TANGO is likely to play a key role in the development and evaluation of future therapies in ACLF.

Ammonia Measurement in Cirrhosis: From ISHEN: J Hepatol | March 2026

Introduction Ammonia has long been recognised as a central neurotoxin in the pathogenesis of hepatic encephalopathy, but its clinical use in cirrhosis has remained inconsistent because of major variability in sampling, processing, reporting, and interpretation. This international ISHEN Delphi consensus is important because it is the first structured, evidence-based effort to define when ammonia should be measured, how it should be measured, and how clinicians should interpret it in both outpatient and inpatient cirrhosis care. The document moves the field beyond the old debate of whether ammonia is useful at all and instead places ammonia within a practical clinical framework. Summary The consensus makes a strong methodological point that ammonia is only clinically useful when measured properly. It recommends a minimum 4-hour fasting period, venous sampling for routine practice, transport on ice, centrifugation within 15 minutes, and measurement within 2 hours. It also advises that ammonia should be reported both as an absolute value and as a multiple of the upper limit of normal to improve comparability across laboratories. In the outpatient setting, ammonia is positioned as a useful biomarker for risk stratification, especially for predicting overt hepatic encephalopathy, liver-related decompensation, and death, with a level greater than 1.4 times the upper limit of normal emerging as an important prognostic threshold. In patients undergoing elective TIPS, pre-procedure ammonia may help predict post-TIPS encephalopathy. In the inpatient setting, ammonia is not considered a standalone diagnostic test for overt hepatic encephalopathy, but a normal value should prompt clinicians to question the diagnosis and search for alternative causes of altered mental status. The consensus also emphasises that serial ammonia measurement has value during treatment, because falling ammonia levels are associated with better neurological recovery and improved survival, whereas persistent or rising ammonia suggests poor response and worse prognosis. Conclusion The major clinical message of this ISHEN consensus is that ammonia should no longer be dismissed as an unreliable biomarker, but neither should it be used in isolation. When measured under standardised conditions and interpreted within the full clinical context, ammonia provides meaningful diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic information in cirrhosis. This document is likely to influence day-to-day hepatology practice, future trial design, and global harmonisation of care in hepatic encephalopathy.

GLP-1RA Improve Liver Outcomes in Patients With Alcohol Use: AJG, March 2026

Introduction Harmful alcohol use remains a major cause of chronic liver disease, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and liver-related mortality worldwide. Despite advances in hepatology care, effective pharmacologic strategies that simultaneously address alcohol use behaviour and liver disease progression are limited. Recent anecdotal observations have suggested that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs)—commonly used for diabetes and obesity—may reduce alcohol craving and consumption. However, their potential impact on liver-related outcomes and mortality in individuals with harmful alcohol use has not been well studied. Summary In this target trial emulation study using US Veterans' electronic health records, investigators evaluated the association between GLP-1 RA use and liver outcomes in patients with harmful alcohol use. A total of 8,040 GLP-1 RA initiators with positive AUDIT-C scores were propensity-score matched with 8,040 nonusers and followed longitudinally. GLP-1 RA therapy was associated with a 30% lower risk of composite liver-related outcomes (hepatic decompensation, hepatocellular carcinoma, liver-related death, or all-cause mortality) (adjusted HR 0.70). Importantly, all-cause mortality was reduced by 57% (adjusted HR 0.43). Among semaglutide users, higher weekly doses were linked with even greater reductions in liver outcomes and mortality. Additionally, GLP-1 RA users showed lower odds of continued harmful alcohol use during follow-up (adjusted OR 0.75). Conclusion GLP-1 receptor agonists may offer dual benefits in patients with harmful alcohol use—reducing alcohol consumption and improving liver-related outcomes and survival. These findings suggest a potential novel therapeutic role for GLP-1 RAs in alcohol-associated liver disease, although randomized clinical trials are needed for confirmation.

Early Portopulmonary Hypertension- J Heptol Feb.26

Portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH) is a serious but frequently underdiagnosed complication of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Traditionally, attention has focused on advanced PoPH, while mild or “borderline” pulmonary hemodynamic abnormalities were often considered clinically insignificant. This multicenter PORTO-DETECT cohort study challenges that assumption by evaluating the prognostic impact of early PoPH, as newly defined by the 2022 ESC/ERS pulmonary hypertension criteria. In this longitudinal study, adults with cirrhosis and portal hypertension underwent systematic right-heart catheterisation and were classified according to pulmonary hemodynamics. Importantly, the revised ESC/ERS definition recognises an early stage of pulmonary arterial hypertension characterised by only mildly elevated mean pulmonary artery pressure and pulmonary vascular resistance. Patients were followed longitudinally to assess survival, with careful adjustment for liver disease severity and transplantation as a competing event. The key finding is that early PoPH carries a substantial and independent mortality risk, comparable in magnitude to classic, overt PoPH. Patients with early PoPH had markedly worse long-term survival than those with normal pulmonary pressures, despite having relatively subtle hemodynamic abnormalities and similar degrees of liver dysfunction. Even mild elevations in pulmonary vascular resistance were independently associated with poor outcomes. In contrast, post-capillary pulmonary hypertension and other unclassified profiles did not confer excess mortality risk. These results have important clinical implications. They demonstrate that pulmonary vascular disease in cirrhosis begins earlier than previously appreciated and that waiting for overt PoPH may miss a critical window for intervention. The study supports systematic screening for pulmonary hypertension in patients with cirrhosis, particularly using the updated ESC/ERS criteria, and highlights the need for closer follow-up and consideration of earlier targeted management in selected patients. In summary, early PoPH is not benign. Recognizing and monitoring this condition may meaningfully improve risk stratification and outcomes in patients with cirrhosis.

UTOpiA: A New Direction for Bioartificial Liver Therapy- AJG Feb.26

Introduction Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is one of the most lethal syndromes in hepatology, characterized by abrupt hepatic decompensation, intense systemic inflammation, multi-organ failure, and very high short-term mortality. Liver transplantation remains the only definitive therapy, but donor shortages mean that most patients never receive it. This unmet need has driven decades of work on bioartificial liver (BAL) systems as temporary extracorporeal support. Traditional BALs have focused primarily on replacing hepatic metabolic and detoxification functions, with limited success in clinical trials. A key reason for failure is increasingly recognized: ACLF is not just liver failure—it is liver failure plus immune dysregulation and systemic inflammation. What’s new: the UTOpiA concept The Takebe group introduces UTOpiA, a next-generation BAL system designed to address both arms of ACLF pathophysiology simultaneously: Hepatic support via induced pluripotent stem cell–derived hepatocyte-like cells (iHLCs) Inflammation control via a granulocyte–monocyte apheresis (GMA) column that removes activated innate immune cells This tandem design allows whole-blood perfusion, avoids plasma separation, and creates a lower-inflammatory environment for the hepatocyte bioreactor. Importantly, the hepatocyte component uses triple-knockout iHLCs to reduce immunogenicity. Why this matters conceptually This work reframes BALs from being: “temporary liver replacement devices” to multifunctional immuno-metabolic therapeutic platforms The preclinical results suggest that hepatic support alone is insufficient in ACLF, but when combined with immune modulation, survival improves dramatically—at least in animal models. Key translational challenges ahead 1) Hepatocyte maturity remains a bottleneck iHLCs provide partial hepatic function but remain metabolically inferior to primary human hepatocytes, particularly for ammonia detoxification—highly relevant in ACLF. 2) Inflammation control carries risks Non-selective depletion of granulocytes and monocytes could increase susceptibility to infection in an already fragile population. 3) Preclinical models are limited Rodent ACLF models do not fully recapitulate human coagulation, immunity, or disease heterogeneity. Large-animal validation is essential. 4) Manufacturing and scalability Reliable, cost-effective production of functional hepatocytes remains the central obstacle for all BAL systems. Broader implications The UTOpiA concept may extend beyond ACLF. Potential future applications include: acute liver failure, post-hepatectomy liver failure, and bridging patients through periods of impaired regeneration. It also highlights the need for new clinical trial endpoints, such as organ failure reversal or ICU-free days, rather than survival alone. Bottom-line takeaway for GastroAGI Effective support for ACLF likely requires treating both liver failure and systemic inflammation. UTOpiA represents a bold step toward this integrated approach, but substantial biologic, safety, and manufacturing challenges must be overcome before clinical translation. One-line GastroAGI takeaway The future of bioartificial livers may lie in immune–hepatic co-therapy, not detoxification alone.

ACLF - Nat.Rev.Gastro Hepato Jan 2026

Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF) is a severe and complex syndrome that occurs in patients with pre-existing chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. It is characterized by acute hepatic decompensation, which leads to worsening portal hypertension, systemic inflammation, a high risk of infection, organ dysfunction, and elevated short-term mortality. ### Key Features and Classification: 1. **Types of ACLF**: - **Type A**: Primarily involves hepatic failure. - **Type B**: Involves extrahepatic organ failure (EHOF). 2. **Pathophysiology**: - Severe hepatic injury in ACLF triggers systemic inflammation driven by damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), gut-derived microbial products, and immunometabolic dysregulation. - Immune dysfunction may manifest either as hyperinflammation (hypercytokinaemia) or as immune paresis, which increases vulnerability to infections and organ failure. 3. **Determinants of Outcomes**: - The outcome in ACLF is influenced by the nature and severity of the acute insult and the underlying hepatic functional reserve. ### Management and Treatment: 1. **Golden Window**: - The first week of illness is critical for implementing interventions. Severity scores, such as those developed by the ACLF Research Consortium and the European Association for the Study of the Liver Chronic Liver Failure Consortium, guide therapeutic decisions during this period. 2. **Management Priorities**: - Addressing the acute hepatic insult. - Managing portal hypertension. - Preventing and reversing organ failure. - Optimizing patients for liver transplantation when necessary. 3. **Therapeutic Approaches**: - Protocol-based critical care hepatology and multidisciplinary approaches have shown success in helping nearly 50% of ACLF patients survive with their native liver. - Emerging therapies include immune modulation, liver regeneration strategies, therapeutic plasma exchange, and artificial liver support systems. 4. **Liver Transplantation**: - Liver transplantation remains the definitive and life-saving therapy for patients with severe ACLF who do not respond to other treatments. ### Advances and Challenges: - The Kyoto ACLF Consensus represents a global effort to standardize definitions, simplify treatment endpoints, and refine prediction tools for ACLF. - Despite progress, significant knowledge gaps remain, particularly regarding targeted non-transplantation interventions. Further research is necessary to improve outcomes for ACLF patients.

Nutrition in Cirrhosis - Hepatology Dec 2025

### Nutrition in Cirrhosis and Liver Transplantation: Cirrhosis is a condition characterized by severe liver dysfunction, often leading to malnutrition, sarcopenia (low muscle mass), and physical frailty. These conditions are prevalent in patients with cirrhosis, affecting 20%–80% of patients with malnutrition, 30%–70% with sarcopenia, and 17%–43% with frailty. Malnutrition and sarcopenia are significant risk factors for poor outcomes, as they reduce functional capacity, impair recovery, and increase the risk of complications both pre- and post-transplant. ### Key Aspects of Nutrition in Cirrhosis: 1. **Nutritional Assessment**: - It is critical to assess the nutritional status of patients with cirrhosis to identify malnutrition, sarcopenia, and frailty. - Tools and guidelines should be used to evaluate body composition, muscle mass, and dietary intake. 2. **Nutritional Intervention**: - Nutritional prehabilitation is essential for patients awaiting LT. This involves optimizing energy intake, protein consumption, and addressing any deficiencies. - Protein intake is particularly important, as it supports muscle health and combats sarcopenia. Recommendations include distributing protein intake evenly throughout the day and ensuring high-quality protein sources. - Adequate energy intake tailored to the patient's body mass index (BMI) is necessary to meet their metabolic demands. - Carbohydrate and fat intake should also be balanced to provide sufficient energy while avoiding complications such as hyperglycemia. 3. **Reassessment and Monitoring**: - Regular follow-up is critical to monitor progress and adjust nutritional interventions as needed. - This approach ensures that nutritional strategies remain effective and aligned with the patient's evolving needs. ### Importance of Nutrition in Cirrhosis: - Proper nutrition can enhance the patient's physiological reserve, improve functional capacity, and reduce the risk of complications during and after LT. - Malnutrition and sarcopenia, if left unaddressed, can impair the patient's ability to recover from surgery, increase the risk of infections, and prolong hospital stays. ### Summary: Malnutrition, sarcopenia, and frailty are common in patients with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT), significantly impacting postoperative outcomes. Nutritional prehabilitation, a key pillar of multidimensional prehabilitation, involves assessing nutritional status, implementing targeted interventions, and regularly reassessing progress. Recommendations emphasize adequate energy intake, high-quality protein distribution, and addressing deficiencies to improve muscle health and functional capacity. Despite its importance, nutrition in LT prehabilitation remains understudied, with future research needed to refine energy needs, explore dietary supplements, and optimize interventions. Current guidelines advocate proactive nutritional strategies to transform the LT waitlist period into an opportunity for functional improvement.

Human Albumin Solutions in Cirrhosis liver - Hept.Comm. Feb.2026

### **Human Albumin Solutions (HAS):** Human Albumin Solution (HAS) is a sterile, purified preparation of human serum albumin, a protein derived from plasma. Albumin plays a critical role in maintaining oncotic pressure (fluid balance in blood vessels) and transporting various substances, including hormones, drugs, and waste products. HAS is administered intravenously and is widely used in clinical settings, particularly in conditions involving fluid imbalance, hypovolemia, and liver disease. ### **Human Albumin Solutions in Liver Cirrhosis:** Liver cirrhosis is a chronic liver disease characterized by scarring (fibrosis) of liver tissue and impaired liver function. Decompensated liver cirrhosis refers to the stage where complications such as ascites (fluid accumulation in the abdomen), hepatic encephalopathy (brain dysfunction due to liver failure), renal dysfunction, and gastrointestinal bleeding occur. HAS is used in the management of these complications due to its ability to restore oncotic pressure, improve circulatory function, and reduce inflammation. ### **Evidence of Human Albumin Use in Cirrhosis:** A systematic review and meta-analysis of 68 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the use of HAS in cirrhotic patients provides the following insights: 1. **Mortality Reduction:** - HAS was associated with a statistically significant reduction in overall mortality compared to alternatives. - The pooled random effect odds ratio (OR) for mortality was 0.769 (95% CI: 0.652–0.908, p=0.0019), indicating a 23.1% reduction in the odds of death. - However, this mortality benefit was primarily observed in smaller trials with fewer than 100 participants. 2. **Reduction in Renal Dysfunction:** - HAS was shown to reduce the odds of renal dysfunction, a common complication of liver cirrhosis, particularly in conditions like hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). 3. **Reduction in Recurrence of Ascites:** - HAS reduced the risk of recurrent ascites, which is a frequent and challenging complication in cirrhotic patients. 4. **Other Complications:** - HAS showed some benefit in reducing the risk of paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction (a complication of large-volume paracentesis, a procedure to remove ascitic fluid). - Limited evidence suggested potential benefits in reducing bacterial infections, hepatic encephalopathy, and portal hypertensive bleeding, but these findings were less consistent. ### **Meta-Analysis Summary:** - **Strengths:** - The meta-analysis demonstrated that HAS has a positive impact on key outcomes, including mortality and complications like renal dysfunction and ascites. - It supports the clinical use of HAS in managing decompensated liver cirrhosis. - **Limitations:** - The majority of the included RCTs were of small size and low quality, which raises concerns about the reliability of the findings. - Only four of the 68 RCTs were evaluated as having a low risk of bias. - The mortality benefit was primarily observed in small trials, suggesting the need for larger, high-quality trials to confirm the findings. - **Conclusions:** - While HAS appears to provide clinical benefits in cirrhotic patients, the evidence is not yet robust enough to make definitive recommendations. - Future research should focus on conducting large, well-designed RCTs to better understand the effectiveness and safety of HAS in this population. ### **Current Clinical Use of HAS in Liver Cirrhosis:** Based on existing evidence, HAS is recommended in specific scenarios for cirrhotic patients: - **Large-Volume Paracentesis:** To prevent paracentesis-induced circulatory dysfunction. - **Hepatorenal Syndrome (HRS):** In combination with vasoconstrictors to improve renal function. - **Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP):** To reduce renal impairment and improve survival. ### **Future Directions:** The systematic review highlights the need for high-quality research to clarify the role of HAS in liver cirrhosis. Future studies should aim to: - Evaluate HAS in larger, multicenter RCTs with rigorous methodology. - Investigate optimal dosing, timing, and duration of HAS therapy. - Compare HAS with alternative therapies or combinations of therapies to determine the most effective approach.

Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: Pathophysiology and Management

Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF) is a distinct clinical syndrome characterized by the rapid deterioration of liver function in patients with pre-existing chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. This condition is associated with a high risk of short-term mortality and involves a complex interplay of systemic inflammation, immune dysfunction, and multiorgan failure. Below is a detailed overview of its pathophysiology and management strategies: --- ### **Pathophysiology of ACLF** 1. **Acute Hepatic Insult on Chronic Liver Disease** - ACLF is triggered by an acute hepatic or systemic insult superimposed on a background of reduced hepatic functional reserve due to chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Common triggers include infections, alcohol binge, drug-induced liver injury, ischemia, or reactivation of hepatitis viruses. 2. **Systemic Inflammation as a Central Driver** - Excessive systemic inflammation is a hallmark of ACLF. It is fueled by the release of damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) from injured liver cells and pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) from gut-derived microbial products. These molecules activate immune pathways, perpetuating inflammation and tissue injury. 3. **Immune Dysregulation** - Patients with ACLF exhibit a spectrum of immune dysfunction, ranging from hyperinflammation to immune paralysis. The hyperinflammatory state leads to progressive organ dysfunction, while immune paralysis increases susceptibility to opportunistic infections, further exacerbating the condition. 4. **Gut-Liver Axis and Microbial Translocation** - Gut dysbiosis (altered gut microbiota) and increased intestinal permeability allow translocation of microbial products (PAMPs) into the systemic circulation. This perpetuates inflammatory signaling, worsening liver injury and systemic inflammation. 5. **Bioenergetic Failure** - Mitochondrial dysfunction and altered cellular metabolism contribute to impaired immune cell function and organ failure. Energy deficits in immune cells and hepatocytes lead to reduced capacity to combat inflammation and repair tissue damage. 6. **Portal Hypertension** - Acute portal hypertension, caused by increased intrahepatic resistance, worsens complications such as ascites, variceal bleeding, and impaired organ perfusion. 7. **Multiorgan Involvement** - ACLF frequently involves multiple organ systems, including: - **Kidneys (Acute Kidney Injury or Hepatorenal Syndrome):** Resulting from systemic inflammation, hypoperfusion, or direct injury. - **Brain (Hepatic Encephalopathy):** Due to ammonia accumulation and systemic inflammation. - **Respiratory System:** Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) or hypoxemia. - **Circulatory System:** Circulatory collapse and hemodynamic instability. - **Coagulation System:** Coagulopathy and bleeding tendencies. 8. **Dynamic Disease Course** - ACLF is a dynamic syndrome where severity can rapidly progress or regress. Early recognition and intervention are critical in determining outcomes. --- ### **Management of ACLF** Management of ACLF requires a multidisciplinary approach aimed at supporting failing organs, controlling triggers, and preventing further complications. #### **1. Early Recognition and Prognostic Scoring** - Early diagnosis and risk stratification using severity scoring systems (e.g., CLIF-C ACLF score, MELD score) are crucial to guide timely interventions. - The "Golden Window" concept highlights the importance of early intervention within the first week of ACLF onset to improve outcomes. #### **2. Intensive Supportive Care** - Patients with ACLF often require admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for close monitoring and support of failing organs. - **Organ Support:** - **Renal Support:** Use of renal replacement therapy (RRT) for acute kidney injury. - **Respiratory Support:** Mechanical ventilation or oxygen therapy for respiratory failure. - **Hemodynamic Support:** Vasopressors for circulatory instability. - **Nutritional Support:** Adequate nutrition to prevent further catabolism and support recovery. #### **3. Infection Control and Prevention** - Infections are a common trigger and complication of ACLF. Broad-spectrum antibiotics are often initiated empirically, followed by targeted therapy based on culture results. - Preventive measures include strict aseptic techniques, prophylactic antibiotics in high-risk patients, and gut decontamination. #### **4. Albumin Therapy** - Albumin, beyond its oncotic properties, has anti-inflammatory and detoxification roles. However, qualitative changes in albumin during ACLF impair its function. Albumin infusion may help reduce inflammation and improve outcomes in selected patients. #### **5. Extracorporeal Liver Support and Bridge Therapies** - **Extracorporeal Liver Support (e.g., MARS, Prometheus):** These devices aim to remove toxins and stabilize patients awaiting transplantation. - **Plasma Exchange:** Used to reduce systemic inflammation and improve organ function in specific cases. #### **6. Liver Transplantation** - Liver transplantation remains the definitive treatment for eligible patients with severe ACLF. It offers the best chance for long-term survival. - Early referral to a transplant center is critical, especially for patients who fail to improve with medical therapy. #### **7. Prevention of Secondary Insults** - Avoidance of further hepatic insults (e.g., alcohol, hepatotoxic drugs) is essential to prevent worsening of ACLF. #### **8. Research and Knowledge Gaps** - There is ongoing research to unify global definitions of ACLF and develop targeted non-transplant therapies. Areas of interest include immunomodulation, gut microbiota modulation, and mitochondrial-targeted interventions. --- ### **Conclusion** ACLF is a complex syndrome with high morbidity and mortality, requiring timely recognition and comprehensive management. The pathophysiology involves a vicious cycle of systemic inflammation, immune dysfunction, and multiorgan failure. Early intervention during the "Golden Window" and intensive supportive care can stabilize patients, while liver transplantation remains the definitive therapy for those with severe disease. Further research is essential to improve understanding and develop novel therapeutic strategies for this challenging condition.

Plasma exchange and Survival- real world data

The real-world data on plasma exchange (PEX) in the context of acute liver failure (ALF) suggests that while PEX may provide certain physiological and clinical benefits, it does not appear to improve overall survival or transplant-free survival when compared to standard medical therapy alone. **Key findings from the real-world study:** 1. **Clinical Context of ALF and PEX Usage:** - Acute liver failure (ALF) is a rapidly progressing condition characterized by severe liver dysfunction, systemic inflammation, and multi-organ failure. Treatment options are limited, with liver transplantation being the primary curative therapy. - Plasma exchange has been explored as a therapeutic option, either as a supportive therapy when transplantation is not feasible or as a bridge to transplant. 2. **Physiological Benefits of PEX:** - PEX was frequently initiated early during intensive care unit (ICU) admission, particularly in patients with more severe illness. - The study showed consistent improvements in haemodynamic stability (blood pressure and circulation) and reduced organ support requirements in patients who underwent PEX. These findings highlight the physiological benefits of PEX in stabilizing critically ill patients with ALF. 3. **Survival Outcomes:** - Despite the physiological improvements, the study found no significant association between PEX and improved overall survival or transplant-free survival after adjusting for baseline differences using propensity score matching. - This suggests that while PEX may help stabilize patients, it does not necessarily translate into better survival outcomes. 4. **Variation in PEX Use:** - There was substantial variation in the use of PEX across liver transplant centres in the United Kingdom, which reflects the lack of standardized guidelines for its application in ALF management. 5. **Study Conclusions:** - PEX may serve as a useful adjunct therapy for stabilizing haemodynamically unstable patients with ALF, especially in critical care settings. - However, its routine use cannot be justified solely based on survival benefits, and further prospective studies are needed to better define its role in ALF management. **Implications for Practice:** - While PEX can provide temporary physiological stabilization, clinicians should carefully consider its use on a case-by-case basis, particularly in the absence of standardized guidelines and clear survival benefits. - Future research is essential to determine whether specific subsets of ALF patients might derive a survival advantage from PEX and to establish standardized protocols for its application. In summary, real-world data indicate that PEX has potential as a supportive therapy in ALF for improving haemodynamic parameters and organ support requirements, but it does not currently demonstrate a survival benefit in clinical practice.

Peripheral Venous Access for Low-Volume Plasma Exchange in Liver Disease

Peripheral venous access for low-volume plasma exchange (PLEX) in liver disease represents a promising approach to address the challenges associated with central venous catheterization, particularly in patients with severe liver disorders such as acute liver failure, acute liver injury, and acute-on-chronic liver failure. Below is a detailed analysis of this topic: ### Background Patients with liver disease often experience coagulopathy and are immunocompromised, which makes central venous catheter placement risky due to complications such as bleeding, infection, and thrombosis. Central venous access also requires higher levels of monitoring and procedural expertise, making it resource-intensive and less feasible in settings with limited healthcare infrastructure. Peripheral venous access, on the other hand, is simpler, less invasive, and has a lower risk of complications, but its feasibility and effectiveness for plasma exchange in liver disease patients have not been thoroughly explored until recently. ### Plasma Exchange in Liver Disease Plasma exchange is a supportive therapy used to remove toxic substances, inflammatory mediators, and harmful proteins from the blood in patients with severe liver disorders. It can stabilize patients and serve as a bridge to liver transplantation or recovery. Low-volume centrifugal plasma exchange is particularly advantageous in resource-limited settings because it requires lower blood flow rates and fewer blood products compared to traditional high-volume methods. ### Advantages of Peripheral Venous Access 1. **Safety**: Peripheral venous access avoids the risks associated with central venous catheterization, such as line infections, pneumothorax, arterial puncture, and thrombosis. This is particularly beneficial for liver disease patients who are already at risk due to coagulopathy and immunosuppression. 2. **Simplicity**: Peripheral access is less technically demanding and can be performed outside intensive care settings, reducing the need for specialized resources and personnel. 3. **Patient-Friendly Approach**: Peripheral venous access is less invasive and potentially more comfortable for patients, improving their overall experience during plasma exchange. 4. **Accessibility**: This method expands the availability of plasma exchange to regions with limited access to advanced healthcare facilities, where central venous catheterization may not be feasible. ### Challenges 1. **Lower Flow Rates**: Peripheral venous access typically supports lower blood flow rates compared to central venous access, which can prolong the duration of the plasma exchange procedure. 2. **Vascular Access Limitations**: Some patients may have poor peripheral venous access due to prior medical conditions or repeated venipunctures, making peripheral PLEX less feasible. 3. **Limited Evidence**: While the study suggests the feasibility of peripheral PLEX, there is still limited large-scale evidence to support its widespread adoption in liver disease management. ### Conclusion The study concludes that peripheral venous access for low-volume centrifugal plasma exchange is a feasible, safe, and patient-friendly alternative to central venous access in a subset of patients with liver disorders. It provides comparable therapeutic efficiency while reducing line-related complications and enabling procedures to be conducted outside intensive care settings. Although the procedure may take longer due to lower flow rates, peripheral PLEX has significant potential to expand access to plasma exchange in resource-limited environments and improve the management of liver disease. ### Implications 1. **Clinical Practice**: Peripheral PLEX could become a standard approach for plasma exchange in liver disease patients, particularly in settings where central venous access is risky or impractical. 2. **Healthcare Systems**: Adoption of peripheral venous access for PLEX could reduce the burden on intensive care units and make plasma exchange more accessible in low-resource settings. 3. **Research Opportunities**: Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and scalability of peripheral PLEX in diverse patient populations and healthcare environments. Peripheral venous access represents an innovative step forward in the management of liver disease patients requiring plasma exchange, offering a safer and more accessible alternative to traditional methods.

Noninvasive Markers of Portal Hypertension and Varices in Noncirrhotic Disease

Noncirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) encompasses a range of disorders affecting the hepatic portosinusoidal vascular system, leading to portal hypertension (PH). Unlike cirrhosis, there are no established noninvasive criteria to diagnose PH or varices in NCPH. A study aimed to address this gap by evaluating noninvasive markers, including liver stiffness measurement (LSM) via transient elastography, platelet count, and imaging/laboratory data, to predict PH and varices. The study included patients with NCPH who underwent transjugular liver biopsy. PH was defined by the presence of varices on endoscopy, portosystemic collaterals, or ascites on imaging. Results indicated that LSM values were higher in patients with PH and varices, while platelet counts were significantly lower in these groups. A multivariate analysis combining LSM and platelet count demonstrated strong predictive ability for PH and varices, with high sensitivity, negative predictive value, and accuracy. A stepwise decision model incorporating platelet count and LSM was developed to noninvasively detect PH and varices. The model showed 100% sensitivity and negative predictive value for both PH and varices, with high overall accuracy. This suggests that combining LSM and platelet count could serve as a reliable, noninvasive method to identify NCPH patients at risk for PH and varices. However, further validation in independent cohorts is necessary to confirm its utility. In conclusion, this study highlights the potential of noninvasive markers as effective tools for diagnosing PH and varices in NCPH, reducing the need for invasive procedures like liver biopsy.

VanC-IT: A Phase 2 Randomized Trial of Oral Vancomycin in Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis

The VanC-IT trial is a phase 2 clinical study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral vancomycin in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), a chronic and progressive liver disease for which no approved disease-modifying therapies currently exist. PSC is characterized by inflammation and scarring of the bile ducts, leading to cholestasis (impaired bile flow), liver damage, and eventually liver failure. Liver transplantation remains the only definitive treatment for PSC. Additionally, PSC is often associated with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), though the disease can occur independently of IBD. ### Study Design: The VanC-IT trial is a **prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 study**, meaning participants are randomly assigned to either the treatment group (oral vancomycin) or the placebo group, and neither the participants nor the researchers know which treatment is being administered (double-blind design). This ensures unbiased assessment of the efficacy and safety of oral vancomycin. The trial is **conducted in Italy** and includes both adult and adolescent patients diagnosed with PSC, regardless of whether they have IBD. Eligible participants undergo a screening process and are stratified based on their baseline liver stiffness before randomization. This stratification ensures that differences in liver stiffness, which is a marker of liver disease severity, are accounted for during analysis. ### Rationale: The rationale for investigating oral vancomycin in PSC stems from emerging evidence that implicates the **gut–liver axis** and **microbiome alterations** in the pathogenesis of PSC. The gut–liver axis refers to the bidirectional relationship between the gastrointestinal tract and the liver, which is influenced by microbial populations in the gut. Alterations in the microbiome may play a role in driving inflammation and immune dysregulation seen in PSC. Oral vancomycin, an antibiotic, has been hypothesized to modulate the gut microbiome and reduce inflammation, making it a potential therapeutic option for PSC. ### Objectives: The trial aims to assess the impact of oral vancomycin on disease activity, with a focus on both efficacy and safety. The study is designed to generate high-quality evidence to inform future therapeutic strategies for PSC. #### Primary Outcome: The primary outcome of the VanC-IT trial is **changes in biochemical markers of cholestasis**, which reflect treatment response. These markers include measurements such as alkaline phosphatase (ALP), bilirubin levels, and other indicators of bile duct function. #### Secondary Outcomes: The secondary outcomes are more comprehensive and include: - Liver biochemistry (e.g., liver enzyme levels). - Disease risk scores (such as the Mayo Risk Score for PSC). - Imaging findings (e.g., changes in liver stiffness or bile duct abnormalities). - Circulating biomarkers related to inflammation and liver function. - Quality of life assessments (to evaluate the impact of treatment on patients' overall well-being). - PSC-related clinical events (e.g., episodes of cholangitis or disease progression). #### Exploratory Outcomes: An important exploratory component of the trial involves investigating treatment-related biological mechanisms, with a focus on: - **Gut microbiota analysis**: Understanding how oral vancomycin affects microbial populations in the gut. - **Metabolomic profiling**: Identifying changes in metabolic pathways that may be linked to treatment effects. - **Immunological markers**: Evaluating immune system changes and inflammatory responses related to treatment. ### Significance: The VanC-IT trial is expected to provide valuable insights into the role of oral vancomycin as a potential therapy for PSC. By rigorously evaluating its efficacy and safety, the trial aims to address the unmet need for disease-modifying treatments in PSC. Additionally, the study’s exploratory analyses may shed light on microbiome-related pathways and mechanisms underlying PSC, which could guide the development of future therapeutic strategies. ### Expected Outcomes: The findings from the VanC-IT trial are anticipated to: 1. Inform the design of larger, definitive clinical trials in PSC management. 2. Provide evidence on the utility of microbiome-targeted therapies in PSC. 3. Improve understanding of the gut–liver axis and its role in PSC pathogenesis. In summary, the VanC-IT trial represents a critical step toward developing effective treatments for PSC, a disease with limited therapeutic options. By investigating oral vancomycin, the study aims to address the urgent need for evidence-based therapies while expanding knowledge of PSC-related biological mechanisms.

Spironolactone, Eplerenone and Ascites

Spironolactone and Eplerenone are both mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) that are commonly used in the management of conditions such as heart failure, hypertension, and ascites due to liver cirrhosis. Ascites is the abnormal accumulation of fluid in the abdominal cavity, often resulting from liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Below is a detailed explanation of their role in managing ascites, their comparative efficacy, and side effect profiles: --- ### **Role in Ascites Management** - **Spironolactone**: - Spironolactone is a potassium-sparing diuretic that blocks aldosterone receptors. Aldosterone promotes sodium and water retention, and its antagonism by spironolactone facilitates the excretion of sodium and water, helping to reduce fluid accumulation in ascites. - It is considered the first-line therapy for ascites due to liver cirrhosis, often in combination with a salt-restricted diet. - **Eplerenone**: - Like spironolactone, eplerenone is also an aldosterone antagonist, but it is a more selective agent. Eplerenone has a lower affinity for androgen and progesterone receptors compared to spironolactone, which reduces its risk of hormonal side effects. - Eplerenone is increasingly being studied as an alternative to spironolactone for managing ascites, especially in patients who are intolerant to spironolactone's side effects. --- ### **Comparison of Efficacy** - Both spironolactone and eplerenone are effective in reducing fluid retention in ascites caused by liver cirrhosis. - In the study cited, spironolactone (100 mg) and eplerenone (100 mg) demonstrated similar efficacy in terms of weight reduction and abdominal girth measurements. This indicates that both drugs are comparable in their ability to manage ascites effectively. - However, eplerenone at a lower dose (50 mg) was found to be less effective compared to spironolactone and eplerenone at 100 mg. --- ### **Side Effect Profiles** - **Spironolactone**: - **Gynecomastia and Mastalgia**: Spironolactone has significant anti-androgenic properties, which can lead to gynecomastia (breast enlargement in men) and mastalgia (breast pain). In the study, 14.28% of patients on spironolactone developed gynecomastia. - **Hyperkalemia**: There is a small risk of hyperkalemia (elevated potassium levels), which was observed in 2.8% of patients in the study. - **Eplerenone**: - Eplerenone has a much lower affinity for androgen and progesterone receptors, which significantly reduces the risk of hormonal side effects such as gynecomastia and mastalgia. In the study, no cases of gynecomastia or mastalgia were reported in patients treated with eplerenone. - Hyperkalemia was not observed in patients treated with eplerenone in the study, although it remains a potential risk with this class of drugs. --- ### **Why is Eplerenone Needed?** Eplerenone is required as an alternative to spironolactone for patients who experience intolerable side effects, particularly gynecomastia and mastalgia, which are common with spironolactone. Its more selective action on aldosterone receptors without significant interaction with androgen or progesterone receptors makes it a better-tolerated option for many patients. --- ### **Conclusion** - Both spironolactone and eplerenone are effective in managing ascites due to liver cirrhosis. However, eplerenone has a superior side effect profile, making it a more favorable option for patients who cannot tolerate the hormonal side effects of spironolactone. - The choice between the two drugs should be individualized based on patient tolerance, side effect profile, and clinical circumstances. - Further studies may be warranted to explore the long-term efficacy and safety of eplerenone in this patient population. In summary, while spironolactone remains a cornerstone in the treatment of ascites, eplerenone is emerging as a valuable alternative with fewer side effects, particularly for patients who are sensitive to spironolactone's hormonal effects.

Plasma Volume expansion in cirrhosis - J of Hepatology - Jan.26

### **Introduction** Plasma volume expansion is a critical therapeutic strategy in the management of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. AKI in cirrhosis often arises due to hypovolemia, which is frequently exacerbated by diuretic therapy, systemic vasodilation, and circulatory dysfunction inherent to advanced liver disease. The primary goal of plasma volume expansion is to restore effective circulating volume, improve renal perfusion, and mitigate kidney injury. Traditionally, therapeutic protocols have favored a fixed duration of plasma volume expansion, most commonly extending to forty-eight hours. However, evolving evidence and expert consensus have challenged this uniform approach, advocating for more individualized strategies tailored to patient response. --- ### **Problem Statement** Despite its central role in AKI management, plasma volume expansion presents several challenges: 1. **Duration of Therapy**: While a forty-eight-hour expansion period has historically been favored, recent discussions suggest shorter durations may suffice in certain cases. However, abbreviated protocols risk misclassifying AKI severity and prematurely discontinuing therapy in patients who may benefit from extended volume support. 2. **Adverse Effects**: Over-administration of fluids in non-responders can lead to complications, such as fluid overload, pulmonary edema, and worsening ascites. Conversely, insufficient resuscitation may fail to address hypovolemia, prolonging kidney injury and worsening outcomes. 3. **Lack of Standardized Criteria**: There is no universally accepted protocol regarding the type of fluid (e.g., albumin versus crystalloids), dosing, or criteria for assessing response. This lack of standardization complicates clinical decision-making and may lead to inconsistent practices across healthcare settings. 4. **Identification of Non-Responders**: Prolonged plasma volume expansion may be unnecessary in patients who fail to show early improvement, underscoring the importance of identifying non-responders and adapting therapy accordingly. These challenges highlight the need for a more nuanced approach to plasma volume expansion, emphasizing individualized treatment strategies based on early assessment of therapeutic response. --- ### **Conclusion** Plasma volume expansion remains a cornerstone of AKI management in cirrhosis and ascites, but its application requires careful consideration to balance benefits against potential harms. While extending therapy to forty-eight hours may improve diagnostic accuracy in selected patients, it is vital to monitor response closely and reconsider prolonged fluid administration in non-responders. An individualized approach—guided by early assessment of therapeutic efficacy—offers the best opportunity to optimize outcomes while minimizing complications. Future research should focus on defining standardized criteria for fluid type, dose, duration, and response evaluation to refine plasma volume expansion strategies further.

Evolving diagnosis of HRS - J of Hepatology - Jan.26

The evolving diagnosis of hepatorenal syndrome–acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) has been a significant topic of discussion in hepatology, nephrology, and critical care, particularly as newer insights challenge traditional diagnostic protocols. Historically, the diagnosis of HRS-AKI has relied heavily on rigid protocols, such as mandatory administration of albumin over a fixed period and adherence to absolute serum creatinine thresholds. These approaches were developed during a time when the understanding of acute kidney injury (AKI) in cirrhosis was relatively limited. However, advances in medical research and clinical care have revealed the complexities of AKI in cirrhosis, including dynamic physiological changes, overlapping mechanisms of kidney injury, and the need for more nuanced, multidisciplinary approaches. ### Problem Statement: The traditional diagnostic framework for HRS-AKI presents several challenges: 1. **Rigid Protocols:** Mandatory empiric albumin administration and fixed serum creatinine thresholds may not account for the diverse phenotypes of kidney injury in cirrhosis. This approach risks misclassification, delays in appropriate therapy, and unnecessary harm to patients who may be euvolemic or volume overloaded. 2. **Overlooking Complexity:** Dichotomizing HRS-AKI and acute tubular necrosis fails to acknowledge diagnostic uncertainty and the overlapping pathophysiology of these conditions. 3. **Disadvantaged Populations:** The reliance on absolute creatinine cutoffs disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, including women, older adults, and individuals with sarcopenia. 4. **Limited Multidisciplinary Input:** Excluding key specialties like nephrology and critical care from guideline development restricts the ability to address the full spectrum of AKI in cirrhosis. ### Conclusion: A protocol-driven approach to diagnosing HRS-AKI no longer aligns with the evolving understanding of kidney injury in cirrhosis. Evidence supports a shift towards precision-based care that emphasizes individualized clinical judgment, early reassessment of volume status, multidisciplinary collaboration, and physiologically guided fluid management. This transition aims to enable timelier diagnoses, more appropriate therapies, and reduced risks of preventable harm. Moving away from historical dogma and embracing personalized clinical decision-making represents a necessary evolution in the care of patients with cirrhosis and acute kidney injury. These advancements underscore the importance of adapting diagnostic frameworks to reflect current scientific knowledge and patient-centered care principles.

The GAVAPROSEC trial - J of Hepatology - Jan.26

The GAVAPROSEC trial provides critical randomized evidence addressing the management of acute gastric variceal bleeding (GVB) in patients with cirrhosis. Gastric variceal bleeding, particularly from fundal gastric varices (GOV2) or isolated gastric varices (IGV1), is a severe and life-threatening complication of portal hypertension, associated with high rebleeding rates and mortality. Despite guidelines recommending endoscopic glue injection for acute hemostasis, the optimal strategy for secondary prophylaxis has remained unclear due to limited robust evidence. The trial investigated the role of pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement within 72 hours after stabilization in patients with acute gastric variceal bleeding. The results demonstrated that pre-emptive TIPS significantly improved rebleeding-free survival compared to standard strategies, which often involve glue obliteration combined with non-selective beta blockers. Importantly, the study found no increase in the incidence of hepatic encephalopathy, a common concern with TIPS procedures. Although no definitive overall survival benefit was observed, the high crossover rate to TIPS in the control group likely diluted the statistical power to detect a survival advantage. The findings of the GAVAPROSEC trial emphasize the limitations of glue-based strategies, which are associated with high rebleeding rates and depend on technical expertise that may not be uniformly available. By contrast, pre-emptive TIPS offers a more effective approach to secondary prophylaxis in this high-risk population. The trial's results support the consideration of pre-emptive TIPS as a first-line strategy after initial stabilization of gastric variceal bleeding, provided that patient selection and local expertise are carefully considered. In conclusion, the GAVAPROSEC trial represents a significant advancement in the management of acute gastric variceal bleeding. It provides strong evidence supporting the use of pre-emptive TIPS to improve clinical outcomes, particularly rebleeding-free survival, in a population with historically poor prognoses. This trial is likely to influence future guidelines and clinical practice, offering a more standardized approach to this challenging condition.

RIPK3 a novel biomarkers in cirrhosis - J of Hepatology - Jan.26

RIPK3 (Receptor-interacting protein kinase 3) is a crucial protein involved in necroptosis, a regulated form of cell death distinct from apoptosis. Necroptosis plays a significant role in inflammatory and degenerative diseases, including liver diseases such as cirrhosis, acute decompensation (AD), and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). RIPK3 is emerging as a novel biomarker in these conditions due to its strong association with disease severity, organ dysfunction, and mortality. ### Problem Statement: Patients with cirrhosis who experience acute decompensation (AD) or progress to acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) frequently develop multi-organ failure and face high mortality rates. Current prognostic models for these patients often lack precision, particularly in identifying key drivers of disease progression. Non-apoptotic forms of cell death, such as necroptosis, have been implicated in the pathophysiology of AD and ACLF, but their contribution to organ failure and mortality has not been fully understood. RIPK3, a central mediator of necroptosis, has been identified as a potential biomarker for these conditions, offering an opportunity to improve risk stratification and guide therapeutic interventions. ### Conclusion: The study highlights RIPK3 as a key driver of organ failure and mortality in patients with AD and ACLF. Elevated plasma levels of RIPK3 were strongly associated with multi-organ dysfunction, particularly hepatic and renal failure, as well as disease progression and mortality. A mortality prediction model incorporating RIPK3 (>2.261x ULN), along with other clinical parameters like CLIF-C OF (Chronic Liver Failure Consortium Organ Failure score) and leukocytosis/leukopenia, demonstrated high accuracy in predicting outcomes. Furthermore, hepatic RIPK1 expression was found to be elevated in ACLF patients and correlated with disease severity and mortality, emphasizing the role of necroptosis originating in the liver. This study underscores the importance of RIPK3 as a biomarker for risk stratification in AD and ACLF. By integrating RIPK3 into predictive models, clinicians can enhance their ability to identify high-risk patients and personalize therapeutic strategies targeting necroptosis. This approach has the potential to revolutionize clinical decision-making and improve outcomes for patients with these life-threatening liver conditions.

INTEGRIS-PSC trial - J of Hepatology -Jan.26

The INTEGRIS-PSC trial, as described in the Journal of Hepatology on January 26, is a phase II clinical study investigating the safety, tolerability, and exploratory pharmacodynamics of **bexotegrast (PLN-74809)**, an oral, once-daily dual selective inhibitor of **αvβ6 and αvβ1 integrins**, in participants with **primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC)** and liver fibrosis. Below is a detailed breakdown of the problem statement, the investigational drug, and the conclusions: ### **What is Bexotegrast?** Bexotegrast (PLN-74809) is a novel, oral, once-daily medication that selectively inhibits **αvβ6 and αvβ1 integrins**. These integrins play a critical role in activating transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) signaling pathways, which are implicated in the development and progression of liver fibrosis. By targeting these integrins, bexotegrast aims to reduce the activation of TGF-β, thereby potentially halting or reversing liver fibrosis in conditions like PSC. ### **Problem Statement** Primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) is a rare, chronic, and progressive cholestatic liver disease of unknown etiology. It is characterized by inflammation and fibrosis of the bile ducts, leading to liver damage and, ultimately, liver failure. Currently, there are no approved therapies to effectively halt or reverse the progression of PSC. This creates an **urgent unmet medical need** for safe and effective treatments that can address the fibrosis and other pathological processes associated with PSC. ### **Study Design** The INTEGRIS-PSC trial was a **randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging phase II study** that enrolled 117 participants with PSC and suspected liver fibrosis. Participants were randomized to receive **bexotegrast** (at doses of 40 mg, 80 mg, 160 mg, or 320 mg) or placebo for varying durations (12 to 40 weeks). The primary endpoint was the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), while exploratory pharmacodynamic endpoints included biomarkers of fibrosis (e.g., ELF score, PRO-C3), liver stiffness measurements, and imaging parameters. ### **Key Findings** 1. **Safety and Tolerability**: - Bexotegrast was well tolerated across all dose levels (up to 320 mg daily for 40 weeks). - The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was similar between the bexotegrast (72.7%) and placebo (70.0%) groups. - TEAEs were mild to moderate, with no serious adverse events attributed to the study drug. 2. **Pharmacodynamic Outcomes**: - Participants receiving bexotegrast showed **numerically less progression in exploratory pharmacodynamic markers** (e.g., ELF score, PRO-C3 levels, MRI-based liver assessments) compared to placebo at Week 12. - Improvements in MRI parameters continued through Week 24, indicating potential ongoing benefits of the drug. ### **Conclusion** The INTEGRIS-PSC trial demonstrated that **bexotegrast is safe and well tolerated** in participants with PSC and liver fibrosis, with no serious drug-related adverse events reported. Additionally, the drug was associated with **less progression in exploratory pharmacodynamic markers** of fibrosis and liver health compared to placebo. These findings support the hypothesis that targeting integrin-mediated TGF-β activation could be a promising therapeutic strategy for PSC. ### **Impact and Implications** This study provides early evidence for the safety and potential efficacy of bexotegrast in PSC, addressing a critical unmet need for therapies capable of halting or reversing the progression of this debilitating disease. Future studies are warranted to further evaluate the long-term efficacy and clinical benefits of bexotegrast in PSC.

ELMWOOD trial for PSC - J of Hepatology - Jan.26

The ELMWOOD trial, published in the Journal of Hepatology on January 26, focuses on evaluating the efficacy and safety of **Elafibranor**, a dual peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α/δ (PPAR-α/δ) agonist, in treating **primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC)**. PSC is a rare, chronic liver disease characterized by progressive inflammation and scarring of the bile ducts, often leading to liver damage and complications such as cirrhosis. ### Problem Statement The trial aimed to address the lack of effective treatments for PSC, as current therapeutic options are limited. Specifically, the study investigated whether Elafibranor could provide biochemical and clinical improvements in patients with PSC, focusing on its impact on **alkaline phosphatase (ALP)** levels (a key marker of liver health) and **enhanced liver fibrosis (ELF) scores**, while also assessing its safety and tolerability compared to placebo. ### Conclusion The ELMWOOD trial demonstrated that **Elafibranor was well tolerated** in patients with PSC and showed **significant biochemical improvements** over 12 weeks compared to placebo. Key findings include: - **ALP reductions**: Elafibranor led to substantial decreases in ALP levels, with greater responses observed at the higher dose (120 mg). ALP normalization occurred only in patients receiving Elafibranor. - **ELF score improvements**: Although changes in ELF scores were observed, the reductions were more modest. - **Safety profile**: Elafibranor was generally safe, with treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) comparable to placebo, and no serious TEAEs reported in the Elafibranor groups. Overall, the trial supports the potential of Elafibranor as a promising therapeutic option for PSC, with the higher dose (120 mg) showing a greater magnitude of response. Further studies are needed to confirm long-term efficacy and safety.

Diet, exercise, ALD and Liver mortality - J of Hepatology-Jan 26

The context you provided discusses the impact of diet quality (DQ) and physical activity (PA) on alcohol-related liver mortality, which is a critical aspect of alcohol-related liver disease (ALD). Although the specific article from the *Journal of Hepatology* on January 26 is not directly referenced in the context, the study described aligns closely with the themes of diet, exercise, ALD, and liver mortality. ### Key Findings Related to Diet, Exercise, and Liver Mortality in ALD 1. **Healthy Diet and Liver Mortality:** - A healthier diet, defined as being in the top quartile of the Healthy Eating Index (HEI), significantly reduces the risk of liver-related mortality among individuals with varying levels of alcohol consumption. - Specifically, diets rich in vegetables, fruits, whole grains, seafood, plant-based proteins, and unsaturated fats—and low in solid fats, alcohol, and added sugars—are protective against liver mortality. - Among heavy and binge drinkers, a healthy diet reduced liver mortality risk by up to 86% (aSHR: 0.14 for heavy drinkers) and 84% (aSHR: 0.16 for binge drinkers), respectively, compared to those with unhealthier diets. 2. **Physical Activity and Liver Mortality:** - Regular physical activity (at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise, 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity exercise, or a combination per week) is associated with a significantly lower risk of liver-related mortality. - Physically active individuals had a reduced risk of liver mortality, even among heavy drinkers (aSHR: 0.64) and binge drinkers (aSHR: 0.31). 3. **Combined Impact of Diet and Exercise:** - The combined effects of a healthy diet and regular physical activity provide substantial protective benefits against alcohol-related liver mortality. - These lifestyle factors are particularly impactful for women, who experienced greater survival benefits compared to men. 4. **Alcohol Consumption and Risk:** - Alcohol consumption, particularly heavy drinking and binge drinking, significantly increases the risk of liver-related mortality. However, the adoption of a healthy diet and regular exercise can mitigate some of this risk. ### Implications for ALD Prognosis: - For individuals with alcohol-related liver disease or at risk of alcohol-related liver mortality, adopting a healthy diet and engaging in regular physical activity can substantially improve prognosis. - These lifestyle modifications may help reduce liver inflammation, improve metabolic health, and enhance overall liver function, thereby lowering mortality risk. - The findings also highlight the importance of public health interventions to promote dietary improvements and physical activity, particularly among populations with high alcohol consumption. ### Conclusion: Healthy eating and increased physical activity are highly impactful in mitigating the prognosis of alcohol-related liver disease (ALD) and reducing liver-related mortality. These lifestyle factors provide a non-invasive, cost-effective approach to improving outcomes for individuals at risk of or suffering from ALD.

Mean arterial pressure, Terlipressin and HRS-AKI

Mean arterial pressure (MAP), terlipressin, and hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) are closely interconnected in the treatment of this severe condition. HRS-AKI is a life-threatening complication of advanced liver disease, characterized by renal dysfunction due to reduced renal perfusion. Terlipressin, a vasopressin analog, is a key pharmacological agent used to reverse HRS-AKI by improving renal blood flow and function. ### Relationship Between MAP, Terlipressin, and HRS-AKI: 1. **Terlipressin and MAP**: Terlipressin works by causing vasoconstriction in the splanchnic (abdominal) circulation, which redistributes blood flow to vital organs, including the kidneys. This leads to an increase in MAP, a critical factor in improving kidney perfusion and function. In the phase 3 clinical trials (REVERSE and CONFIRM), terlipressin was shown to significantly increase MAP compared to placebo. For instance, on day 1 of treatment, the terlipressin group had a MAP of 85 mm Hg compared to 75 mm Hg in the placebo group, with sustained increases observed over time. 2. **MAP and HRS-AKI Reversal**: The post hoc analysis revealed that each 5 mm Hg increase in MAP was associated with a 17% higher likelihood of HRS-AKI reversal (hazard ratio: 1.17). This underscores the importance of MAP as a pharmacodynamic target in the treatment of HRS-AKI. 3. **Mediation Analysis**: The study found that MAP mediated the effect of terlipressin on HRS-AKI reversal, with an average of 33% of the treatment effect being mediated through MAP. This indicates that the increase in MAP is a key mechanism by which terlipressin achieves its therapeutic effect. ### Conclusion: Terlipressin effectively increases MAP, which plays a crucial role in reversing HRS-AKI. The findings highlight the importance of monitoring and targeting MAP as part of the therapeutic strategy for managing HRS-AKI.

Terlipressin and HRS-AKI (Hepatology Jan 26)

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a serious complication of advanced liver disease and portal hypertension, characterized by acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI). It is a functional form of renal failure that occurs in the absence of significant structural kidney damage. HRS-AKI is primarily caused by severe renal vasoconstriction and systemic circulatory dysfunction due to splanchnic vasodilation, which is a hallmark of advanced liver disease. This condition is associated with a very poor prognosis if left untreated, making timely and effective management critical. ### Pathophysiology of HRS-AKI: HRS-AKI develops as a result of a complex interplay of factors, including: 1. **Portal Hypertension and Splanchnic Vasodilation**: Liver dysfunction leads to increased nitric oxide and other vasodilators in the splanchnic circulation, causing significant vasodilation. 2. **Systemic Circulatory Dysfunction**: The excessive pooling of blood in the splanchnic circulation results in reduced effective arterial blood volume, which activates compensatory mechanisms such as the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), sympathetic nervous system, and antidiuretic hormone release. 3. **Renal Vasoconstriction**: These compensatory mechanisms cause intense renal vasoconstriction, reducing renal perfusion and glomerular filtration rate (GFR), ultimately leading to HRS-AKI. ### Terlipressin: Mechanism of Action Terlipressin is a synthetic vasopressin analogue that has become a cornerstone in the management of HRS-AKI. It is a prodrug that is converted into lysine vasopressin, its active form, in the body. Terlipressin works by targeting the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of HRS-AKI. Its primary actions include: 1. **Vasoconstriction in the Splanchnic Circulation**: - Terlipressin acts on V1 receptors in vascular smooth muscle, leading to vasoconstriction, particularly in the splanchnic circulation. - This reduces splanchnic vasodilation, corrects the pooling of blood in the splanchnic bed, and improves effective arterial blood volume. 2. **Improvement in Systemic Hemodynamics**: - By restoring effective arterial blood volume, Terlipressin helps improve systemic blood pressure and reduces the compensatory activation of vasoconstrictive systems like RAAS and the sympathetic nervous system. 3. **Reduction in Renal Vasoconstriction**: - As systemic hemodynamics improve, renal perfusion is enhanced, and renal vasoconstriction is alleviated, leading to improved GFR and kidney function. 4. **Reversal of HRS-AKI**: - By addressing the primary drivers of HRS-AKI, Terlipressin has been shown to reverse the condition in a significant proportion of patients when used in combination with albumin, which helps expand plasma volume and further supports renal perfusion. ### Clinical Use of Terlipressin in HRS-AKI: Terlipressin is the only vasoconstrictor therapy approved in some regions for the treatment of HRS-AKI. It is typically administered intravenously, with dosing adjusted based on the patient's response. The combination of Terlipressin and albumin has been shown to improve renal function, reduce serum creatinine levels, and increase survival rates in patients with HRS-AKI. ### Evidence Supporting Terlipressin: Several clinical trials, including the CONFIRM trial, have demonstrated the efficacy of Terlipressin in reversing HRS-AKI. Key findings include: - Higher rates of HRS reversal compared to placebo. - Improved renal function and reduced need for renal replacement therapy. - Some studies suggest a survival benefit, although this remains a topic of ongoing research. ### Adverse Effects and Limitations: While effective, Terlipressin is associated with potential side effects, including: - Ischemic complications (e.g., mesenteric or cardiac ischemia) due to its vasoconstrictive properties. - Gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhea or abdominal pain. - Hypertension or bradycardia in some patients. Close monitoring of patients receiving Terlipressin is essential to minimize these risks. It is contraindicated in patients with severe cardiovascular disease or advanced ischemic conditions. ### Conclusion: Terlipressin is a highly effective therapy for the management of HRS-AKI, targeting the underlying pathophysiology of the condition. By improving systemic hemodynamics, reducing splanchnic vasodilation, and enhancing renal perfusion, it can reverse HRS-AKI in a significant proportion of patients. When used in combination with albumin, Terlipressin represents a critical intervention for improving outcomes in this life-threatening condition. However, careful patient selection and monitoring are essential to mitigate potential adverse effects.

Cirrhosis and Extrahepatic organ failures

Cirrhosis is a severe liver condition that can progress to acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), a life-threatening state characterized by organ failures beyond the liver, known as extrahepatic organ failures (EHOFs). EHOFs commonly affect the kidneys, brain, respiratory system, or circulatory system. A recent study analyzed hospital admissions data from Germany, France, Italy, and Denmark (2005–2020 for Germany; 2017–2020 for others) to assess the burden of cirrhosis combined with EHOFs. The study revealed that, out of 1,599,680 hospital admissions for cirrhosis across the four countries, 329,093 (20.6%) involved at least one EHOF. Kidney failure was the most common EHOF (52.9%), followed by respiratory failure (41.2%). Although the overall number of hospital admissions for cirrhosis decreased over time, the proportion of admissions with EHOFs increased from 19.9% to 21.5%. Patients with EHOFs had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality rate (29.2%) compared to those with cirrhosis alone (7.9%). EHOFs in cirrhosis patients accounted for 44.9% of healthcare claims, highlighting the substantial economic strain on healthcare systems. These findings emphasize the urgent need for stakeholders to implement strategies to reduce the burden of EHOFs in cirrhosis patients, improving outcomes and alleviating healthcare costs.

VOCAL-Penn score

The VOCAL-Penn score (VPS) is a medical risk prediction tool developed in 2021 to estimate postoperative mortality and decompensation risk in patients with cirrhosis undergoing surgical procedures. It is widely adopted in clinical practice, with over 15,000 users annually, and has been incorporated into major national and international society guidelines. ### Key Features of the VOCAL-Penn Score: 1. **Purpose**: The VPS helps clinicians assess the risks associated with surgery in patients with cirrhosis, a population that often faces higher surgical risks due to their complex medical condition. 2. **Clinical Use**: The tool is designed to support surgical decision-making by providing accurate predictions of postoperative outcomes, enabling clinicians to better stratify risk and guide treatment plans. 3. **Adoption**: Since its introduction, the VPS has achieved significant real-world uptake, indicating its utility and credibility among healthcare providers. ### Factors Supporting Its Adoption: The VOCAL-Penn score has been successful due to its alignment with five key design and implementation factors identified through clinician feedback: 1. **Efficiency**: The tool is intuitive, requires minimal inputs, and integrates seamlessly into clinical workflows. 2. **Accessibility**: Input variables are clinically meaningful and readily available, making the tool easy to use in practice. 3. **Transparency**: The development process of the VPS is transparent, fostering trust among clinicians. 4. **Accuracy**: Comparative performance data and external validations ensure the tool’s credibility and reliability. 5. **Generalizability**: The score is applicable across diverse patient populations, supporting equitable use. ### Context of Development: The VPS was developed during a time when advancements in data science, electronic health records, and machine learning were driving the proliferation of medical prediction tools. Despite the availability of such tools, many faced challenges in achieving sustained clinical adoption due to usability and implementation issues. The VPS stands out as an example of a prediction model that successfully bridges the gap between statistical rigor and practical usability. ### Research Insights: A qualitative study involving 22 diverse clinicians who care for cirrhosis patients highlighted the importance of aligning risk prediction tools like the VPS with real-world clinical needs. Clinicians emphasized that tools should be easy to use, credible, and seamlessly integrated into existing workflows to encourage adoption. ### Conclusion: The VOCAL-Penn score serves as a model for designing effective medical risk prediction tools. By addressing practical factors such as efficiency, accessibility, transparency, accuracy, and generalizability, the VPS has achieved widespread use and has provided valuable insights for developing future tools. Its success demonstrates the importance of considering both statistical performance and real-world implementation needs in the design of clinical prediction models.

Adrenal Dysfunction and HPA Axis Impairment in Decompensated Cirrhosis

Adrenal dysfunction (AD) and hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis impairment are important yet poorly understood phenomena in patients with decompensated cirrhosis, particularly in stable, non-hospitalized individuals. The study you referenced provides valuable insights into the prevalence, underlying mechanisms, and clinical implications of AD in this patient population. ### Key Findings: 1. **Prevalence of Adrenal Dysfunction**: - AD was identified in 33% of stable outpatients with Child-Pugh B or C cirrhosis using adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) stimulation testing. AD was defined as a delta cortisol increase of less than 9 µg/dL following ACTH stimulation. 2. **Mechanisms of Adrenal Dysfunction**: - Despite impaired cortisol responses in patients with AD, their baseline ACTH levels were not elevated. This finding suggests that the dysfunction is likely due to inappropriate central HPA axis signaling (secondary adrenal insufficiency) rather than primary adrenal gland failure. - Biochemical analysis revealed impaired adrenal steroidogenesis, as evidenced by a significantly reduced 17-hydroxyprogesterone to 11-deoxycortisol ratio. This suggests potential inefficiency in enzymatic pathways involved in cortisol synthesis. - Inflammatory markers, such as interleukin-6 (IL-6), were significantly higher in patients with AD. IL-6 levels were inversely correlated with cortisol response, indicating that immune-mediated inflammation may modulate or impair the HPA axis. 3. **Clinical Implications**: - Over a 12-month follow-up period, AD was not associated with worse clinical outcomes, including mortality, hospitalization, liver transplantation, or portal hypertension-related decompensation. - These findings suggest that AD in stable outpatients with decompensated cirrhosis represents a form of extrahepatic organ dysfunction linked to cirrhosis, rather than a primary driver of short-term adverse outcomes. 4. **Prognostic Significance**: - Unlike in critically ill cirrhotic patients, adrenal dysfunction in stable outpatients does not appear to have significant prognostic implications in the short term. - The study highlights the need for additional research to explore the potential long-term consequences of AD and whether interventions targeting the HPA axis could improve outcomes. ### Mechanistic Insight: - This study emphasizes the multilevel impairment of the HPA axis in decompensated cirrhosis. The dysfunction appears to involve central signaling abnormalities, enzymatic inefficiencies in cortisol synthesis, and immune system interactions. - The elevated IL-6 levels and their inverse correlation with cortisol response provide evidence for immune-mediated modulation of the HPA axis, which may play a role in the pathophysiology of AD in this population. ### Research Implications: - The findings underscore the importance of further longitudinal studies to determine the long-term impact of adrenal dysfunction in cirrhosis. - Interventional studies may also be needed to assess whether addressing HPA axis impairment or modulating inflammation can improve clinical outcomes in this population. ### Conclusion: Adrenal dysfunction in decompensated cirrhosis is a complex, multifactorial condition involving central HPA axis impairment, altered adrenal steroidogenesis, and immune system interactions. While it is prevalent among stable outpatients, it does not appear to significantly influence short-term outcomes such as mortality or hospitalization. The study provides a foundation for further research into the mechanisms and potential therapeutic strategies for managing AD in cirrhosis.

Incidence and Clinical Significance of Recompensation After HCV Cure

The incidence and clinical significance of recompensation after hepatitis C virus (HCV) cure in patients with decompensated cirrhosis have been a focus of detailed analysis. Here is a comprehensive breakdown based on the given context: ### **Incidence of Recompensation** 1. **Recompensation Rate**: Among patients with decompensated cirrhosis who achieved sustained virologic response (SVR) following direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy, approximately **36.6%** achieved recompensation during the follow-up period. This indicates that over one-third of these patients experienced significant clinical improvement. 2. **Time to Recompensation**: The median time to achieve recompensation was **under two years** after HCV cure, suggesting that clinical improvement can occur relatively early following viral eradication. 3. **Definition of Recompensation**: Recompensation was defined using the Baveno VII criteria, which required: - Etiological cure of HCV. - Resolution of ascites and hepatic encephalopathy without medication. - No variceal bleeding for a minimum duration of 12 months. ### **Clinical Significance of Recompensation** Recompensation is clinically significant as it leads to substantial improvements in patient outcomes, although it does not fully restore the risk profile to the level of compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD). 1. **Reduced Liver-Related Mortality**: Achieving recompensation was associated with a **markedly lower risk of liver-related death** compared to patients who remained decompensated. This highlights the potential for improved survival outcomes. 2. **Improved Overall Survival**: Overall mortality was significantly lower in recompensated patients. However, their survival rates did not reach those of patients with compensated ACLD, indicating that recompensated patients still carry residual risks. 3. **Lower Risk of Portal Vein Thrombosis (PVT)**: Recompensated patients had a **substantially reduced incidence of portal vein thrombosis** compared with non-recompensated individuals. This suggests that recompensation has a positive impact on vascular complications. 4. **Persistent Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)**: Despite achieving recompensation, the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remained **significant** and comparable to that of patients with decompensated cirrhosis. This underscores the need for continued HCC surveillance. 5. **Intermediate Risk Profile**: Recompensated patients demonstrated an **intermediate risk profile** between compensated ACLD and decompensated cirrhosis across major clinical endpoints, such as mortality and complications. 6. **Further Decompensation Risk**: Nearly **one-fifth (20%)** of recompensated patients experienced subsequent redecompensation during follow-up. This indicates that recompensation is not always durable, and vigilance is required even after clinical improvement. ### **Predictors and Barriers to Recompensation** 1. **Positive Predictor - Serum Albumin**: Higher serum albumin levels were independently associated with a greater likelihood of achieving recompensation. Albumin is a key marker of liver function and overall health status. 2. **Negative Predictor - Diabetes**: The presence of diabetes significantly reduced the probability of recompensation after HCV cure. This suggests that metabolic comorbidities can hinder clinical improvement. 3. **MELD Score Not Predictive**: The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, commonly used to assess liver disease severity, did not independently predict recompensation or long-term outcomes after viral eradication. 4. **HCC as a Barrier**: Development of de novo hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) prevented recompensation, as no patient achieved recompensation after the onset of HCC. 5. **Alcohol Use**: Ongoing alcohol consumption remained a concern even after HCV cure, potentially limiting the benefits of recompensation and increasing the risk of liver-related complications. ### **Long-Term Management Implications** 1. **Surveillance and Monitoring**: Recompensated patients cannot be managed like those with compensated ACLD due to persistently elevated risks of complications such as HCC and redecompensation. Continued **surveillance for HCC and other complications** is essential. 2. **Alcohol Abstinence**: Addressing alcohol use is critical to maximizing the benefits of recompensation and reducing the risk of further liver damage. 3. **Tailored Clinical Management**: Recompensated patients require individualized management strategies to address their intermediate risk profile and prevent further decompensation. 4. **Durability of Outcomes**: Long-term follow-up (median exceeding eight years in the study) is crucial to assess the durability of recompensation and to identify patients at risk of redecompensation or other adverse outcomes. ### **Conclusion** Recompensation after HCV cure is a clinically significant outcome, offering substantial improvements in survival, reduced liver-related mortality, and lower risk of complications like portal vein thrombosis. However, recompensation does not eliminate all risks, as patients remain vulnerable to hepatocellular carcinoma, redecompensation, and other complications. Continued surveillance and tailored clinical management are essential for optimizing outcomes in this patient population.

Early Hepatic Encephalopathy After TIPS Is Associated With Reduced Survival

Yes, early hepatic encephalopathy (HE) after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement is strongly associated with reduced survival. This conclusion is supported by a large multicenter analysis involving 1,356 patients with cirrhosis who underwent TIPS placement across eight German tertiary centers. The study followed patients longitudinally for up to 30 months to evaluate HE occurrence and survival outcomes, providing critical insights into the timing and prognostic significance of HE. ### Key Findings: 1. **Impact of Early HE on Survival**: - Early HE, defined as episodes occurring within 30 days after TIPS insertion, was strongly associated with impaired survival compared to patients who did not develop HE. - The negative prognostic impact of HE was driven entirely by these early episodes, highlighting their clinical importance. 2. **Late HE Not Harmful**: - HE occurring after 30 days post-TIPS did not worsen survival, suggesting that the timing of HE is crucial in determining its prognostic significance. 3. **Landmark Analysis Confirmation**: - Thirty- and ninety-day landmark analyses confirmed early HE as an independent predictor of mortality, reinforcing its role in survival outcomes. 4. **Severity of HE**: - The survival outcomes did not differ significantly between patients with grade 2 HE versus grade 3–4 HE. This indicates that the occurrence of early HE itself, rather than its severity, is the critical factor impacting survival. 5. **Pre-TIPS HE and Survival**: - A history of HE before TIPS was an independent predictor of worse post-TIPS survival. Patients who had both pre-TIPS HE and early post-TIPS HE demonstrated the poorest survival outcomes, identifying them as the highest-risk group. 6. **Risk Factors for Early HE**: - Several factors increased the risk of developing early HE, including: - Older age. - Impaired renal function. - Hyponatremia. - Higher MELD (Model for End-Stage Liver Disease) score. - Prior history of HE. 7. **Portal Pressure Reduction**: - The hemodynamic response to TIPS, specifically portal pressure reduction, was similar regardless of HE development, suggesting that early HE reflects overall patient vulnerability rather than being a direct cause of mortality. ### Clinical Implications: - **Monitoring and Follow-Up**: - Patients with pre-TIPS HE or early post-TIPS HE require intensified monitoring and follow-up to address their heightened risk of mortality. - **Prognostic Scores**: - Current prognostic scores like MELD and FIPS do not fully account for the timing of HE, indicating the need for improved tools to assess risk in patients undergoing TIPS. - **Global Vulnerability Marker**: - Early HE may serve as a marker of global patient vulnerability rather than a direct cause of death, emphasizing the importance of identifying and managing underlying factors contributing to HE. ### Conclusion: Early HE after TIPS is a critical prognostic factor associated with reduced survival. Identifying high-risk patients, such as those with pre-TIPS HE or early post-TIPS HE, and implementing tailored management strategies are essential to improve outcomes after TIPS placement.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Ascites, Volume Overload, and Hyponatremia in Cirrhosis

The American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update on Ascites, Volume Overload, and Hyponatremia in Cirrhosis provides evidence-based guidance on the management of these complications in patients with cirrhosis. Below is a detailed summary of the key points from the update: ### **1. Volume Overload in Cirrhosis** - **Hallmarks:** Ascites, hepatic hydrothorax, peripheral edema, and anasarca are defining features of decompensated cirrhosis caused by portal hypertension. - **Pathophysiology:** Portal hypertension leads to neurohormonal activation, which drives renal sodium and water retention, intravascular hypovolemia, and fluid redistribution. - **Impact on Quality of Life:** Volume overload is associated with frequent hospitalizations, reduced quality of life, and increased mortality. ### **2. Ascites Management** - **First-Line Treatment:** - **Dietary Sodium Restriction:** Sodium restriction is critical for managing ascites. Early referral to a dietitian is recommended to ensure adequate nutrition while achieving sodium restriction. - **Diuretics:** Spironolactone and furosemide are used in combination, typically in a 100:40 mg ratio, to improve natriuresis while maintaining electrolyte balance. - **Weight Targets for Diuresis:** - Safe diuresis targets are 0.5 kg/day in patients without peripheral edema and up to 1 kg/day in patients with peripheral edema. - **Diagnostic Paracentesis:** - All hospitalized patients with new or worsening ascites should undergo prompt diagnostic paracentesis to evaluate for spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). - Ascitic fluid analysis (cell count and cultures) is essential for diagnosing SBP, even in asymptomatic patients. - **Refractory Ascites:** - Defined as ascites that is unresponsive or intolerant to diuretics and requires repeated therapeutic paracentesis. - Intravenous albumin is recommended when removing more than 5 L of ascites to prevent circulatory dysfunction. - **TIPS Procedure:** - Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) should be considered for selected patients with refractory ascites, hepatic hydrothorax, or hyponatremia. ### **3. Hepatic Hydrothorax** - **Prognosis:** Hepatic hydrothorax is associated with worse outcomes compared to refractory ascites. - **Management:** - Symptomatic hepatic hydrothorax requires thoracentesis for both diagnostic purposes and symptom relief. - **Transplant Referral:** All patients with hepatic hydrothorax should be evaluated for liver transplantation, irrespective of their MELD score. ### **4. Hyponatremia in Cirrhosis** - **Prevalence and Pathophysiology:** Hyponatremia in cirrhosis is usually hypervolemic and reflects advanced circulatory dysfunction. - **Diagnostic Workup:** Comprehensive evaluation includes assessing medications, renal function, infections, and endocrine disorders. - **Management:** - **Outpatient Care:** Asymptomatic patients can be managed with fluid restriction, diuretic adjustments, and close monitoring. - **Inpatient Care:** Severe or symptomatic hyponatremia requires hospitalization, fluid restriction, intravenous albumin, or vasoconstrictors. - **Multidisciplinary Approach:** Refractory hyponatremia requires coordinated care involving hepatology, nephrology, and transplant teams. ### **5. Liver Transplantation** - **Universal Referral:** All patients with ascites or hepatic hydrothorax should be evaluated for liver transplantation, regardless of their MELD score. ### **6. Multidisciplinary Management** - Patients with refractory volume overload or hyponatremia benefit from a collaborative approach involving hepatologists, nephrologists, dietitians, and transplant teams for optimal care. ### **Conclusion** The AGA guidelines emphasize a structured approach to managing ascites, volume overload, and hyponatremia in cirrhosis. Early intervention, patient-centered care, and multidisciplinary collaboration are essential to improve outcomes and quality of life for affected patients.

Circulating microbiome profiling in transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt patients: 16S rRNA vs. shotgun sequencing

The study focused on comparing the performance of 16S rRNA sequencing and shotgun metagenomic sequencing for profiling the circulating microbiome in patients undergoing transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedures. Below is a detailed breakdown of the findings and implications: ### **Clinical Context** - Profiling the circulating microbiome in blood samples is inherently challenging due to **low microbial biomass** and **high host DNA contamination**, which can obscure microbial signals. - The TIPS procedure, which creates a shunt between the portal and systemic circulation, provides a unique opportunity to simultaneously collect blood samples from the **portal vein**, **hepatic vein**, and **peripheral vein**, reducing inter-individual variability and allowing for more robust comparisons of the circulating microbiome. --- ### **Comparison of 16S rRNA Sequencing vs. Shotgun Metagenomic Sequencing** #### **1. Sensitivity and Detection** - **16S rRNA sequencing** demonstrated **greater sensitivity** in detecting microbial signals in blood samples compared to shotgun metagenomics. - It was particularly effective in identifying **low-abundance and rare microbial taxa**, which are often missed by shotgun sequencing. - Shotgun metagenomics faced significant limitations due to **high host DNA interference**, which reduced its ability to detect microbial DNA effectively. #### **2. Taxonomic Coverage** - **16S rRNA sequencing** provided **broader taxonomic coverage**, identifying a wider range of microbial taxa. - Shotgun sequencing was limited in its ability to detect a diverse microbial community, partly due to its susceptibility to host DNA contamination. #### **3. Method-Specific Bias** - There was **low concordance** between the taxonomic profiles generated by the two methods, indicating method-dependent biases. - Many microbial genera were uniquely detected by 16S rRNA sequencing, while some were exclusively identified by shotgun sequencing, though these were sporadic and inconsistently present across samples. - Primer mismatches in 16S rRNA sequencing explained why certain taxa detected by shotgun sequencing were absent in 16S datasets. #### **4. Detection Depth** - 16S rRNA sequencing reached sufficient detection depth more efficiently than shotgun metagenomics, making it more practical for analyzing low-biomass samples like blood. --- ### **Microbial Diversity and Composition** #### **1. Alpha Diversity (Within-Sample Diversity)** - Microbial diversity within blood samples remained **stable across different vascular compartments** (portal, hepatic, and peripheral veins). #### **2. Beta Diversity (Between-Sample Diversity)** - The composition of microbial communities did not significantly differ between the portal, hepatic, and peripheral blood compartments, suggesting a **homogeneous circulating microbiome** across these regions. #### **3. Core Microbiota** - Both sequencing methods consistently detected a **shared core microbiota**, further supporting the stability and uniformity of the circulating microbiome across different blood compartments. --- ### **Peripheral Blood as a Representative Sample** - Peripheral blood was found to reliably represent the **systemic circulating microbiota**, making it a convenient and accessible sample source for future microbiome studies. --- ### **Clinical and Translational Implications** #### **1. Feasibility for Clinical Use** - **16S rRNA sequencing** emerged as a more **practical, cost-effective, and sensitive** method for clinical studies of the circulating microbiome, particularly in low-biomass samples like blood. - Shotgun metagenomics, while comprehensive in other contexts, was less suitable for blood microbiome studies due to its susceptibility to host DNA contamination and lower sensitivity. #### **2. Future Research Directions** - The findings support the use of **16S rRNA sequencing** and **peripheral blood sampling** in future studies of the circulating microbiome. - The ability of 16S rRNA sequencing to detect low-abundance taxa and provide broader taxonomic coverage makes it especially valuable for investigating the role of the microbiome in systemic diseases and conditions associated with TIPS patients. --- ### **Conclusion** The study highlights the superiority of **16S rRNA sequencing** over shotgun metagenomics for profiling the circulating microbiome in TIPS patients. It offers greater sensitivity, broader taxonomic coverage, and better feasibility for clinical applications. Peripheral blood sampling was validated as a reliable and representative approach for systemic microbiome studies, paving the way for translational research into the role of the circulating microbiome in health and disease.

ACLF—Contrasting Perspectives From the East and West

Acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) is a severe condition characterized by acute decompensation in patients with chronic liver disease, accompanied by organ failures and high short-term mortality. However, the definitions, triggers, and management strategies for ACLF differ significantly between Eastern (Asia–Pacific) and Western perspectives. Below is a detailed comparison of the contrasting approaches from the East and West: --- ### **1. Definitions: APASL vs AASLD/CLIF** #### **Eastern Perspective: APASL (Asia–Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver)** - **Definition**: ACLF is primarily defined as an *acute hepatic insult* in a patient with chronic liver disease or compensated cirrhosis. This insult leads to: - **Jaundice** (bilirubin ≥5 mg/dL) - **Coagulopathy** (INR ≥1.5) - Complications within 4 weeks, including **ascites** and/or **encephalopathy**. - **Focus**: Liver failure is considered the primary event, with extrahepatic organ dysfunction being secondary. - **Triggers**: Common acute hepatic insults include: - Flare of hepatitis B virus (HBV) - Acute alcoholic hepatitis - Drug-induced liver injury - Infection - **Approach**: The definition emphasizes liver-centric failure and its progression to multi-organ dysfunction. #### **Western Perspective: AASLD/CLIF (American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases / Chronic Liver Failure Consortium)** - **Definition**: ACLF is defined in patients with *decompensated cirrhosis* based on the presence of **organ failures**, assessed using: - **CLIF-SOFA/CLIF-OF score**, which evaluates: - Liver function - Kidney function - Brain function - Coagulation - Circulation - Respiration - Associated 28-day mortality risk is a key component of the definition. - **Focus**: ACLF is considered a **multiorgan failure syndrome** in cirrhosis, where organ dysfunctions occur simultaneously. - **Triggers**: Common triggers include: - Infection (e.g., spontaneous bacterial peritonitis) - Active alcohol use - Gastrointestinal bleeding - **Approach**: The definition highlights systemic involvement and multiorgan failure. --- ### **2. Management: East vs West** #### **Western Perspective: AASLD/EASL-CLIF** - **Early ICU-Level Care**: Patients with ACLF are often admitted to intensive care units for close monitoring and aggressive interventions. - **Sepsis Control**: Infection is a frequent trigger, and early, aggressive management of sepsis is emphasized. - **Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT)**: For acute kidney injury or hepatorenal syndrome. - **Vasopressors**: Used to manage circulatory dysfunction and maintain hemodynamic stability. - **Transplantation**: There is a strong emphasis on early liver transplant evaluation. The approach follows a "transplant or die" paradigm for high-grade ACLF, as transplantation is often the definitive treatment for survival. - **Focus**: Systemic support and transplant-centered care. #### **Eastern Perspective: APASL** - **Medical Management and Liver Regeneration**: - **Antiviral Therapy**: For HBV flares, antiviral agents are used to control the underlying hepatic insult. - **Albumin Infusions**: To improve circulatory dysfunction and reduce inflammation. - **Plasma Exchange**: Used in some centers to support liver function and remove toxins. - **Stem-Cell/Regenerative Therapies**: Experimental approaches are employed in select centers to promote liver regeneration. - **Transplantation**: While liver transplantation is important, access to transplantation is often limited in resource-constrained settings. As a result, there is greater focus on bridging and rescue therapies. - **Focus**: Liver-centric management and regeneration-friendly approaches. --- ### **3. Why This Contrast Matters** Understanding the differences between Eastern and Western approaches to ACLF is crucial for a comprehensive perspective on the disease. Here’s why: #### **Recognition of ACLF Across Different Etiologies** - In Asia, HBV-related ACLF is more prevalent, whereas alcohol-related ACLF and metabolic dysfunction-associated liver disease (MASLD, formerly NAFLD) are more common in the West. - Recognizing the specific triggers and etiologies helps tailor early diagnosis and interventions. #### **Adaptation to Resource-Limited Settings** - In regions where liver transplantation is not readily available, Eastern approaches focus on medical management and regenerative therapies as alternatives to transplantation. - Western approaches, on the other hand, emphasize transplantation as the definitive treatment for ACLF. #### **Convergence Toward Unified Management** - Both Eastern and Western perspectives are gradually converging toward a phenotype-based, transplant-aware approach to ACLF. - There is growing interest in combining liver regeneration strategies with systemic support for multiorgan failure. --- ### **Conclusion** The contrasting perspectives from the East and West highlight the complexity of ACLF as a global health challenge. While the East focuses on liver-centric mechanisms and regeneration, the West emphasizes systemic multiorgan failure and transplantation. Understanding these differences enables clinicians to: - Recognize ACLF early, regardless of etiology. - Adapt management strategies based on available resources. - Work toward a unified, patient-centered approach to ACLF care.

Management of alcohol use disorder in alcohol-related liver disease

Management of alcohol use disorder (AUD) in alcohol-related liver disease (ArLD) is a critical component of improving patient outcomes and preventing the progression of liver damage. The coexistence of AUD and ArLD presents unique challenges, as effective management requires addressing both the addiction and the liver disease in an integrated and comprehensive manner. Below is a detailed overview of the management strategies: ### 1. **Importance of AUD Treatment in ArLD** - AUD is the primary driver of ArLD progression, and abstinence from alcohol is the cornerstone of treatment. - Treating AUD can halt or even reverse the progression of ArLD, particularly in the early stages of the disease. - Despite the proven benefits, AUD treatment is underutilized in patients with ArLD, with fewer than 20% receiving any form of treatment and less than 2% being prescribed pharmacotherapy. --- ### 2. **Approaches to Management** #### a) **Medical Addiction Therapy** - **Benefits**: Medical therapies for AUD have been shown to reduce binge drinking, hospitalizations, and the risk of hepatic decompensation. - **Pharmacotherapies**: Several medications are available for treating AUD, but their use in ArLD requires careful consideration due to potential hepatotoxicity, renal excretion, and central nervous system (CNS) effects. - **Naltrexone**: Effective for reducing alcohol cravings but should be avoided in patients with acute liver failure or advanced liver disease due to hepatotoxicity. - **Acamprosate**: A safe option for patients with liver disease as it is primarily excreted by the kidneys, but it should be avoided in those with significant renal impairment. - **Disulfiram**: Generally not recommended in ArLD due to the risk of hepatotoxicity. - **Baclofen**: A promising option for patients with ArLD as it is not metabolized by the liver and has shown efficacy in promoting abstinence. - **Monitoring**: Liver function tests and renal function should be closely monitored during pharmacotherapy. #### b) **Psychotherapy** - Psychotherapeutic interventions are essential in managing AUD and improving liver-related outcomes. - **Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)**: Helps patients identify and manage triggers for alcohol use. - **Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET)**: Focuses on enhancing motivation to change drinking behavior. - **12-Step Programs and Support Groups**: Provide peer support and accountability. - Evidence suggests that psychotherapy is associated with lower rates of hepatic decompensation and better overall outcomes. #### c) **Integrated Care Models** - Integrated care involves embedding AUD treatment within liver clinics, rather than relying on standard referrals to addiction services. - **Benefits**: - Improves patient engagement and adherence to treatment. - Increases abstinence rates. - Leads to better clinical outcomes, including reduced progression of liver disease. - Multidisciplinary teams, including hepatologists, addiction specialists, psychologists, and social workers, are key to the success of integrated care models. --- ### 3. **Challenges in Management** - **Stigma**: Patients with AUD often face stigma, which can deter them from seeking or adhering to treatment. - **Practitioner Confidence**: Hepatology and gastroenterology practitioners may lack confidence or training in managing coexisting AUD and ArLD. - **Comorbidities**: Patients with ArLD often have other medical and psychiatric comorbidities that complicate treatment. - **Limited Access**: Access to specialized addiction services and integrated care models may be limited in some settings. --- ### 4. **Benefits of Treating AUD in ArLD** - **Improved Liver Function**: Abstinence can lead to significant improvements in liver function and even reversal of liver damage in early-stage disease. - **Reduced Risk of Complications**: Effective AUD treatment reduces the risk of hepatic decompensation and other complications of advanced liver disease. - **Lower Mortality**: Patients with ArLD who achieve sustained abstinence have significantly lower mortality rates compared to those who continue drinking. --- ### 5. **Future Directions** - Research is needed to optimize treatment strategies for this high-risk population, including: - Identifying the most effective pharmacotherapies for patients with advanced liver disease. - Developing and testing novel integrated care models. - Addressing barriers to care, such as stigma and limited access to addiction treatment. - Personalized treatment approaches that consider the severity of liver disease, comorbidities, and individual patient needs are essential. --- ### 6. **Key Takeaways** - AUD treatment is fundamental to the management of ArLD and significantly improves outcomes. - A combination of pharmacological and psychological therapies, tailored to the individual patient’s needs, is the most effective approach. - Integrated care models that combine AUD treatment with liver disease management offer the best outcomes in terms of patient engagement, abstinence, and clinical results. - Addressing barriers to care and increasing practitioner confidence in managing AUD and ArLD are critical to improving treatment uptake and outcomes. By addressing AUD in patients with ArLD through a multidisciplinary and patient-centered approach, it is possible to reduce the burden of liver disease, improve quality of life, and extend survival.

Esophagogastric Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension

Esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EVB) is a critical and potentially life-threatening complication of cirrhotic portal hypertension, resulting from elevated portal venous pressure due to liver cirrhosis. Understanding the pathophysiology, diagnosis, management, and prevention of EVB is essential for improving patient outcomes. Here is a comprehensive overview: ### Pathophysiology: - **Portal hypertension**: Cirrhosis leads to increased resistance to portal blood flow, causing elevated portal pressure. This results in the development of gastroesophageal varices as collateral pathways to relieve pressure. - **Variceal rupture**: The high-pressure varices, particularly in the esophagus and stomach, are prone to rupture, leading to significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding. This is the deadliest complication of portal hypertension. --- ### Staging of Cirrhosis and Risk Stratification: - **Compensated cirrhosis (Stages 1–2)**: Patients have no or minimal complications, and the risk of variceal bleeding is lower. - **Decompensated cirrhosis (Stages 3–5)**: Patients develop complications such as variceal bleeding, ascites, or hepatic encephalopathy. Variceal bleeding risk increases significantly. - **Late decompensated cirrhosis (Stage 6)**: Associated with very high mortality rates. --- ### Diagnosis: 1. **Noninvasive Tools**: - Liver stiffness measurement (LSM) using transient elastography: - **LSM >25 kPa** or **20–25 kPa with low platelet count (<150,000/μL)** strongly suggests clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). - **LSM <15 kPa with normal platelets** rules out CSPH. 2. **Gastroscopy**: - **Gold standard** for diagnosing varices. - Detects and grades varices based on size, presence of red wale signs, and bleeding risk. - Severity classification: - **Mild**: Straight veins. - **Moderate**: Tortuous veins or red color (RC+) signs. - **Severe**: Beady or tumor-like veins with high rupture potential. 3. **LDRf Classification**: - A Chinese system based on **Location (L)**, **Diameter (D)**, and **Risk factors (Rf)** to guide treatment selection and timing. --- ### Management of Acute Esophagogastric Variceal Bleeding (AEVB): 1. **Initial Stabilization**: - ICU admission for hemodynamic monitoring and airway protection. - **Restrictive blood transfusion** targeting hemoglobin levels of 70–80 g/L. - Correct coagulopathy if needed. 2. **Pharmacologic Therapy**: - **Vasoactive drugs** (first-line therapy): - Terlipressin, somatostatin, or octreotide, administered for 3–5 days to reduce portal pressure and control bleeding. - **Prophylactic antibiotics**: - Cephalosporins (e.g., ceftriaxone) reduce the risk of infections, early rebleeding, and mortality, especially in Child-Pugh B/C patients. 3. **Endoscopic Therapy**: - **Esophageal varices**: - Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is the primary treatment. - Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) is used if EVL is not feasible. - **Gastric varices**: - Tissue glue injection (e.g., cyanoacrylate) is the first-line therapy. - Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided therapy improves outcomes by achieving superior occlusion rates and reducing recurrence. 4. **Rescue Therapy**: - **Sengstaken-Blakemore tube**: - Temporary measure for uncontrolled bleeding when EVL or TIPS is unavailable. It carries high rebleeding and complication rates. - **TIPS (Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt)**: - Definitive rescue therapy for refractory bleeding. - Early or preemptive TIPS (pTIPS) within 72 hours is beneficial for high-risk patients: - Child-Pugh B with active bleeding. - Child-Pugh C (<14 points) with HVPG >20 mmHg. --- ### Prevention Strategies: #### 1. **Primary Prevention** (Preventing the first bleed): - **Treating the underlying cause of cirrhosis**: - Antiviral therapy for HBV/HCV. - Managing alcohol-related liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). - Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) formulas may help slow fibrosis and reduce portal pressure. - **Nonselective beta-blockers (NSBB)**: - Not recommended for patients without varices (do not prevent varice formation). - Recommended for mild varices with high-risk features (e.g., Child-Pugh B/C or RC+ signs). Options include propranolol or carvedilol. - **Moderate-severe varices**: - NSBB or EVL can lower the risk of the first bleed. - EVL is preferred if NSBB are contraindicated or not tolerated. - **Carvedilol**: - More potent than propranolol, reducing hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) by up to 20%. #### 2. **Secondary Prevention** (Preventing rebleeding after the first episode): - Initiate within 5 days of the initial bleed. - Combination of **NSBB (e.g., carvedilol)** and **EVL** is the standard approach. - TIPS is considered for patients with persistent high-risk features or recurrent bleeding despite optimal therapy. --- ### Prognosis: - **First EVB episode**: High mortality risk, requiring emergency management. - **Late-stage cirrhosis**: Patients in stages 5–6 have poor outcomes, emphasizing the need for aggressive prevention and timely intervention. --- ### Key Takeaways: - EVB is a medical emergency that requires a multidisciplinary approach, including pharmacologic, endoscopic, and sometimes surgical interventions. - Early diagnosis and risk stratification using noninvasive tools and gastroscopy are critical. - Preventive strategies, including NSBB, EVL, and addressing the underlying cause of cirrhosis, are essential to reduce morbidity and mortality. - TIPS is an effective rescue therapy for refractory bleeding but is reserved for high-risk patients due to the increased risk of hepatic encephalopathy.

Breath Biopsy

Breath Biopsy refers to a cutting-edge, non-invasive diagnostic technique that analyzes volatile organic compounds (VOCs) present in exhaled breath to detect metabolic changes associated with various diseases, including liver conditions such as cirrhosis. This approach leverages the fact that VOCs are byproducts of metabolic processes, and their composition can change due to disease-related dysfunctions in the body. Breath Biopsy offers a promising alternative to traditional methods, providing earlier detection, disease staging, and insights into underlying metabolic alterations. ### Key Features and Insights from Breath Biopsy in Cirrhosis: 1. **Non-Invasive Diagnostic Tool**: - Breath Biopsy provides a non-invasive method to detect liver disease by analyzing exhaled VOCs, which reflect metabolic changes in the body. - It eliminates the need for invasive procedures like liver biopsies or blood tests, making it patient-friendly. 2. **Study Setup**: - A study compared exhaled breath samples from 46 cirrhosis patients and 42 healthy controls using standardized Breath Biopsy OMNI™ GC-MS technology. - This advanced technology ensured high accuracy in identifying and quantifying VOCs. 3. **VOC Biomarker Identification**: - Out of the VOCs analyzed, 29 compounds significantly differed between cirrhosis patients and controls, forming the basis for biomarker discovery. - Seven specific VOCs provided optimal diagnostic accuracy: limonene, 2-pentanone, eucalyptol, dimethyl selenide, indole, an alkene, and an alkylbenzene. 4. **Diagnostic Accuracy**: - A classification model based on the seven VOCs achieved excellent diagnostic performance, with a cross-validated area under the curve (AUC) of 0.95±0.04. - This accuracy was notably higher than using limonene alone, demonstrating the superiority of multi-VOC panels over single biomarkers. 5. **Metabolic Insights from VOCs**: - Elevated levels of **limonene** and **2-pentanone** were linked to decreased CYP2C9/2C19 metabolism and impaired hepatic clearance in cirrhosis. - Reduced levels of **dimethyl selenide** reflected altered selenium metabolism and impaired detoxification pathways. - Increased levels of **indole** were associated with gut microbiota overproduction and reduced hepatic clearance. 6. **Correlation with Liver Function**: - Eleven VOCs showed strong correlations with liver function tests, including bilirubin, albumin, and INR, highlighting their functional relevance. - Limonene exhibited the strongest clinical correlation, positively correlating with bilirubin/INR and inversely with albumin, indicating worsening liver function. 7. **Disease Staging Capability**: - Principal Component Analysis (PCA) revealed that VOC changes could distinguish cirrhosis severity. For example, Child-Pugh B patients clustered away from healthy controls, suggesting potential for staging liver disease. 8. **Environmental Factors and Quality Control**: - Rigorous blank and quality-control procedures excluded environmental contaminants, ensuring reliable identification of true breath biomarkers. - Standardized breath collection methods, including purified inhaled air and controlled sampling, reduced measurement noise and improved accuracy. 9. **Influence of Comorbidities**: - Certain VOCs were influenced by comorbid conditions: - Portal hypertension increased limonene and 2-pentanone levels. - Obesity elevated indole levels. 10. **Superiority of Multi-VOC Panels**: - A multi-VOC panel outperformed single biomarkers, capturing the complexity of metabolic changes in cirrhosis and providing a more comprehensive diagnostic signature. ### Advantages of Breath Biopsy: - **Early Detection**: VOC analysis can detect cirrhosis earlier than traditional methods, potentially improving patient outcomes. - **Non-Invasive and Convenient**: Breath sampling is simple, painless, and can be performed repeatedly for monitoring purposes. - **Functional Insights**: VOC changes provide direct insights into impaired liver metabolism and detoxification pathways. - **Potential for Disease Staging**: Breath Biopsy can help stratify patients by disease severity, aiding in clinical decision-making. ### Limitations and Future Directions: - **Influence of Comorbidities**: VOC levels can be affected by conditions like obesity or portal hypertension, requiring careful interpretation. - **Standardization**: While standardized breath capture methods have improved accuracy, further refinement is needed for widespread clinical adoption. - **Biomarker Validation**: Larger-scale studies are required to validate the identified VOCs and ensure reproducibility across diverse populations. ### Conclusion: Breath Biopsy represents a transformative diagnostic tool for liver diseases like cirrhosis. By analyzing exhaled VOCs, it provides a non-invasive, accurate, and functional assessment of metabolic dysfunction. With continued research and technological advancements, Breath Biopsy has the potential to revolutionize disease detection, staging, and management in clinical practice.

Bacterial Infections in ACLF

Bacterial infections play a critical role in the development and progression of Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF). They are not only common in ACLF patients but are also a major precipitating factor that significantly worsens short-term outcomes, including mortality rates. Below is a detailed overview of bacterial infections in ACLF: ### 1. **Bacterial Infections as Triggers of ACLF** - Bacterial infections are one of the primary triggers of ACLF. They frequently precipitate the condition and exacerbate its severity. - Infections lead to systemic inflammation, immune dysregulation, and multi-organ failure, which are hallmarks of ACLF. ### 2. **High Prevalence of Infections in ACLF** - Infection rates in ACLF patients range between 55% and 81%, with the prevalence increasing in patients with more severe ACLF grades. - Infections are a common complication in ACLF, and their presence is associated with poorer clinical outcomes. ### 3. **Geographic Variation in Infection Rates and Types** - The type and prevalence of infections vary globally: - **Asia**: Higher rates of Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP) and pneumonia. - **Europe and North America**: Higher prevalence of urinary tract infections (UTIs). ### 4. **Nosocomial Infections** - A significant proportion of infections in ACLF patients are nosocomial (hospital-acquired), often occurring within the first 3–5 days of hospitalization. - Patients who develop secondary infections are at an even higher risk of mortality. ### 5. **Common Types of Infections in ACLF** - The most frequent infections include: - **Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis (SBP)**: The most common infection in ACLF. - **Urinary Tract Infections (UTIs)** - **Pneumonia** - **Skin and soft tissue infections** ### 6. **Diagnostic Challenges** - A significant proportion (up to 69%) of infections in ACLF patients are culture-negative, making diagnosis and treatment decisions challenging. - Differentiating between bacterial colonization and true infection is difficult, particularly in cases like SBP. - Emerging biomarkers, such as lactoferrin, calprotectin, presepsin, sTREM-1, and ddPCR-based bacterial DNA detection, are improving early diagnosis. ### 7. **Microbial Patterns** - **Gram-negative bacteria**: Predominate in ACLF infections, with *Escherichia coli* and *Klebsiella pneumoniae* being the most common pathogens. - **Multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) bacteria**: Rising globally, with MDR prevalence ranging from 19% to 70%. The Indian subcontinent reports particularly high rates of MDR infections. ### 8. **Impact on Outcomes** - Infected ACLF patients have significantly higher mortality rates at 28 and 90 days compared to non-infected patients. - Certain infections, such as SBP and bacteremia, are associated with worse outcomes. - MDR infections lead to septic shock, reduced treatment response, and increased mortality due to resistance to empirical antibiotics. ### 9. **Pathophysiology** - ACLF patients exhibit a unique immune profile characterized by simultaneous systemic inflammation and immune paralysis, increasing susceptibility to infections. - Bacterial products, such as lipopolysaccharides (LPS), trigger excessive cytokine release (e.g., IL-6, TNF-α), leading to immune-cell dysfunction, tissue injury, and multi-organ failure. ### 10. **Management of Bacterial Infections in ACLF** - **Early Empirical Antibiotics**: Prompt initiation of broad-spectrum antibiotics is critical for improving survival. Therapy should be tailored based on local resistance patterns and infection settings. - For community-acquired SBP: Tigecycline or piperacillin–tazobactam is recommended. - For MDR infections: Carbapenem combined with agents like linezolid or daptomycin may be required. - **De-escalation**: Antibiotic therapy should be adjusted based on culture results to avoid unnecessary antibiotic exposure and reduce resistance. ### 11. **Prevention Strategies** - **Antibiotic Prophylaxis**: Norfloxacin, rifaximin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) can prevent SBP but may increase MDR rates. Careful patient selection is essential. - **Non-Antibiotic Options**: Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs), fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), and nutritional interventions (e.g., vitamin D and zinc supplementation) show potential in reducing infection risk, but more evidence is needed. - **Albumin Therapy**: Albumin has immunomodulatory properties, improves circulatory and renal function, and reduces prostaglandin E2 (PGE2)-mediated immune suppression. ### 12. **Emerging Therapies** - Novel therapies are being investigated to address infection and immune dysfunction in ACLF, including: - **IL-22Fc**: Targets inflammation and promotes liver regeneration. - **Glutamine synthetase (GLUL) inhibitors**: Reduce inflammation. - **Omega-3 fatty acids**: May have anti-inflammatory effects. - **Herbal formulations**: Such as Qingdu Decoction, which shows promise in reducing inflammation and infections. ### Conclusion Bacterial infections in ACLF are a significant clinical challenge due to their high prevalence, diagnostic complexities, and association with increased mortality. The rising rates of MDR and XDR bacteria further complicate management. Early diagnosis, prompt and appropriate antibiotic therapy, and infection prevention strategies are critical for improving outcomes in ACLF patients. Emerging diagnostic tools and therapies offer hope for better management in the future, but further research is needed to validate their efficacy.

Enterococcus faecium DNA in acute decompensated cirrhosis

Enterococcus faecium (EF) DNA plays a significant role in acute decompensated liver cirrhosis, particularly in cases of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). Cirrhosis, a severe liver condition, causes over 2 million deaths annually, with ACLF being the most critical stage due to systemic inflammation and multi-organ failure. EF DNA was detected in 26% of cirrhosis patients, compared to only 1.3% of healthy individuals, highlighting its strong association with the disease. EF DNA is linked to systemic inflammation, as evidenced by elevated levels of inflammatory markers like leukocytes, C-reactive protein (CRP), and interleukin-6 (IL-6). EF-positive patients, especially those with ACLF, exhibited worse liver function (higher bilirubin and AST levels) and kidney dysfunction (elevated serum creatinine), suggesting a connection to hepatorenal syndrome. EF DNA also correlates with portal hypertension, indicating that bacterial translocation worsens intestinal permeability, a key factor in inflammation and disease progression. Molecular detection using RT-qPCR is highly effective in identifying EF DNA, outperforming traditional culture methods. Clinical biomarkers such as IL-6, CRP, and creatinine can help monitor EF-associated inflammation. Overall, EF DNA serves as a promising biomarker of gut barrier dysfunction, systemic inflammation, and kidney injury in decompensated cirrhosis and ACLF, offering potential for early diagnosis and targeted treatment.

Hepatitis B Guidelines- AASLD 2025

The 2025 AASLD/IDSA Practice Guideline on the treatment of chronic hepatitis B was released on November 4, 2025. It includes significant updates compared to the previous guidelines from 2018. Below is a detailed summary of the changes: ### 1. **Pregnancy — Antiviral Prophylaxis to Prevent Mother-to-Child Transmission (MTCT):** - **2018 Guidelines:** Suggested initiating antiviral therapy during the third trimester for pregnant women with HBV DNA levels >200,000 IU/mL. Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) was the preferred antiviral. Prophylaxis could be stopped at delivery or up to 4 weeks postpartum. - **2025 Guidelines:** - Strong recommendation to start TDF (preferred) or tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) for women with HBV DNA >200,000 IU/mL. - Optimal initiation of antiviral therapy is at gestational week 28 (third trimester). - TAF is now acknowledged as an option, with accumulating safety data supporting its use. - Earlier initiation (week 16) may be considered in cases where infant hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) is unavailable or if invasive procedures (e.g., amniocentesis) are anticipated. - Prophylaxis can be stopped at delivery if there is no ongoing maternal indication, with detailed monitoring recommended after discontinuation. --- ### 2. **Drugs Preferred in Pregnancy:** - **2018 Guidelines:** TDF was preferred. Lamivudine and telbivudine were shown to reduce MTCT historically but were not preferred. TAF had limited data for pregnancy at the time. - **2025 Guidelines:** TDF remains the preferred antiviral, but TAF is now specifically acknowledged as a viable option due to reviewed safety data. Entecavir is not recommended for use during pregnancy due to insufficient safety data. --- ### 3. **Timing of Prophylaxis (Earlier Initiation / Special Circumstances):** - **2018 Guidelines:** Antiviral therapy was generally recommended during the third trimester for pregnant women with high viral loads, and postpartum monitoring was advised. - **2025 Guidelines:** - Week-28 initiation remains optimal for prophylaxis. - Earlier initiation (week 16) is suggested to control viremia when infant HBIG is not available, based on new randomized controlled trial (RCT) evidence. - Earlier initiation is also recommended if invasive procedures like amniocentesis are anticipated. --- ### 4. **High-Risk Transmission (HBsAg+ Persons in Settings with Risk of Infecting Others):** - **2018 Guidelines:** Focused on counseling, vaccination of close contacts, reducing exposure, and considering antiviral therapy for prevention in pregnancy or other high-risk situations. - **2025 Guidelines:** - For viremic individuals who do not meet disease-specific treatment criteria but are in high-risk transmission scenarios (e.g., immunocompromised contacts, household contacts), shared decision-making about antiviral therapy is recommended (conditional, very low certainty). - Expanded considerations for implementation include vaccination status and the health of close contacts. --- ### 5. **Immune-Tolerant Phase (HBeAg+, Very High HBV DNA, Normal ALT):** - **2018 Guidelines:** Treatment was generally not recommended for true immune-tolerant adults. Treatment was reserved for immune-active disease. Monitoring was advised for children/adolescents until they transitioned out of this phase. - **2025 Guidelines:** - Antiviral therapy is suggested for immune-tolerant individuals >40 years old or those with significant inflammation (≥G2) or fibrosis (≥F2). - For individuals <40 years old without fibrosis or inflammation, shared decision-making and periodic monitoring are recommended. - The new guidelines provide clearer thresholds for age, fibrosis, and inflammation to guide treatment decisions. --- ### 6. **Indeterminate Phase (HBeAg-Negative, Non-Cirrhotic with Intermediate Labs):** - **2018 Guidelines:** Recommended individualized decisions for treatment. Monitoring and treatment were advised when immune-active criteria were met. - **2025 Guidelines:** - Shared decision-making is explicitly recommended for these HBeAg-negative, indeterminate patients. - Reassessment is emphasized at each visit if treatment is deferred (conditional recommendation, very low certainty). --- ### Key Takeaways: - The 2025 guidelines provide more specific recommendations based on new evidence, particularly regarding pregnancy and high-risk transmission scenarios. - Tenofovir alafenamide (TAF) is now acknowledged as a safe option during pregnancy, alongside TDF. - Earlier initiation of prophylaxis is recommended in certain circumstances, such as lack of infant HBIG availability or invasive procedures during pregnancy. - Clearer criteria for treatment initiation in immune-tolerant and indeterminate phases are outlined, emphasizing shared decision-making and periodic monitoring. These updates reflect a more nuanced and evidence-based approach to managing chronic hepatitis B, particularly in special populations and settings with higher transmission risks.

Emerging and potential use of CRISPR in human liver disease

CRISPR technology is rapidly emerging as a transformative tool in the study and treatment of human liver diseases. Its versatility and precision have opened up new possibilities for understanding liver disease mechanisms, developing models, and advancing therapeutic interventions. Below is an in-depth overview of the emerging and potential uses of CRISPR in human liver disease: ### 1. **Gene Therapy for Genetic Liver Diseases** CRISPR holds immense promise for curing genetic liver disorders by correcting mutations responsible for these conditions. Some notable applications include: - **Alpha-1 Antitrypsin Deficiency (AATD):** CRISPR can target and repair mutations in the SERPINA1 gene, which cause AATD, a condition leading to liver damage and emphysema. - **Wilson Disease:** Mutation correction in the ATP7B gene, which is responsible for copper accumulation in the liver, offers potential for treatment. - **Ornithine Transcarbamylase (OTC) Deficiency:** CRISPR can repair mutations in the OTC gene, which causes urea cycle defects leading to ammonia buildup. - **Hemochromatosis:** Editing the HFE gene to prevent iron overload in the liver could mitigate the effects of this disease. ### 2. **Treatment of Systemic Disorders via Liver-Directed Editing** The liver plays a central role in systemic metabolic processes, making it an ideal target for treating systemic disorders. CRISPR is being explored for: - **Transthyretin Amyloidosis (ATTR):** Liver-directed CRISPR editing of the TTR gene has shown promise in reducing toxic amyloid protein production. Clinical trials, such as NTLA-2001, have demonstrated high efficacy and safety with durable gene silencing. - **Hypercholesterolemia:** CRISPR-mediated inhibition of the PCSK9 gene in liver cells can significantly lower cholesterol levels. VERVE-101, a base-editing therapy targeting PCSK9, is under clinical investigation. - **Hemophilia:** Editing the F9 gene to restore factor IX production in hemophilia B patients could offer a long-term cure. ### 3. **Liver Cancer Modeling and Therapy** CRISPR has revolutionized liver cancer research by enabling rapid development of models and therapeutic approaches: - **Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Models:** CRISPR has been used to create mouse models of liver cancer by targeting tumor suppressor genes (e.g., Pten and Trp53). These models help uncover oncogene cooperation and mutation profiles. - **Gene Screening for Tumorigenesis:** Pooled CRISPR screens have identified essential and suppressive genes involved in liver cancer, aiding in the discovery of therapeutic targets. - **Potential Therapies:** CRISPR-based approaches could be used to target oncogenes or restore tumor-suppressor gene function in liver cancer patients. ### 4. **Research on Metabolic Liver Diseases** CRISPR is being employed to study and potentially treat metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), formerly known as NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease): - **Gene Targeting for Lipid Accumulation:** Genes like MRG15 have been identified as drivers of lipid accumulation in the liver, and CRISPR-based approaches could provide therapeutic interventions. - **Hepatocyte-Specific Studies:** Conditional CRISPR knockouts (e.g., Sh3rf2) are being used to understand liver-cell–specific gene functions related to metabolism and steatosis. ### 5. **Antiviral Applications** CRISPR screens have identified host genes essential for viral replication, offering potential antiviral targets for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV): - **HBV:** Genome-wide CRISPR screens revealed genes like ZCCHC14, TRIM26, and FLAD1 as critical for HBV replication. Targeting these genes could pave the way for new antiviral therapies. - **HCV:** CRISPR could potentially disrupt pathways essential for HCV replication, providing a novel therapeutic strategy. ### 6. **Liver Fibrosis Research and Therapy** CRISPR screens have uncovered key regulators of liver fibrosis, a major complication of chronic liver diseases: - **Proteasome Subunits and TGF-β Signaling:** Proteasome subunits were identified as regulators of hepatic stellate cell activation through the TGF-β pathway. Targeting these pathways could prevent or reverse fibrosis progression. - **Gene Targets:** CRISPR-based approaches could be used to modulate genes involved in fibrosis to promote liver regeneration and healing. ### 7. **Liver Regeneration Studies** CRISPR is being used to study genes involved in liver regeneration and hepatocyte fitness: - **FAH−/− Repopulation Model:** This high-throughput in vivo CRISPR screening system is employed to identify genes regulating liver regeneration and hepatocyte survival. - **Single-Cell CRISPR Integration:** Combining CRISPR editing with single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) allows researchers to study gene-specific effects on liver cell heterogeneity and regeneration. ### 8. **Clinical Trials and Therapeutic Progress** CRISPR-based therapies for liver diseases have entered human clinical trials, demonstrating promising results: - **NTLA-2001:** A CRISPR-based therapy for TTR amyloidosis has shown durable gene silencing with high efficacy and safety in patients. - **VERVE-101:** A PCSK9-targeting base-editing therapy for hypercholesterolemia is undergoing clinical evaluation. - **Future Therapies:** CRISPR holds potential for the development of therapies targeting other liver diseases, such as MASLD and liver cancer. ### 9. **Future Outlook** CRISPR technology offers unprecedented precision in the study and treatment of liver diseases, but several challenges remain: - **Delivery Efficiency:** Efficient delivery systems, such as adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors and lipid nanoparticles, need further optimization for liver-specific targeting. - **Off-Target Effects:** Ensuring the safety of CRISPR therapies by minimizing unintended edits is a critical area of ongoing research. - **Ethical Considerations:** The use of CRISPR in humans raises ethical concerns, particularly for germline editing and long-term consequences. ### Conclusion CRISPR is revolutionizing the field of liver disease research and therapy, enabling precise gene editing to correct genetic disorders, study disease mechanisms, and develop novel treatments. As the technology continues to advance, it holds the potential to provide cures for genetic liver diseases, systemic disorders, liver cancer, fibrosis, and viral infections. However, addressing delivery challenges, off-target effects, and ethical considerations will be essential to fully harness its therapeutic potential.

Mean arterial pressure in patients with cirrhosis and AKI

Mean arterial pressure (MAP) plays a critical role in managing patients with cirrhosis and acute kidney injury (AKI), but its application in this population is nuanced and requires careful consideration of individual patient characteristics. Here is a detailed overview of the key aspects related to MAP in patients with cirrhosis and AKI: ### 1. **Study Findings on MAP and AKI Recovery in Cirrhosis** - A study by Cullaro et al. demonstrated a strong association between MAP levels and AKI recovery in cirrhotic patients. Specifically: - **Higher MAP (>78 mm Hg):** Associated with a greater likelihood of AKI recovery. - **Lower MAP (<78 mm Hg):** Linked to worse liver function, more severe portal hypertension, and increased incidence of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS). - This suggests that maintaining adequate MAP may play a role in improving kidney function in cirrhosis-related AKI. ### 2. **MAP as a Perfusion Target** - Adequate MAP is critical for ensuring kidney perfusion and preventing further renal injury. In septic shock, maintaining MAP between **80–85 mm Hg** is known to improve kidney outcomes. However, the optimal MAP threshold for cirrhosis-related AKI remains uncertain. - Cirrhotic patients often have complex, multifactorial hemodynamic instability, which makes setting a universal MAP target challenging. ### 3. **Variability in MAP Targets** - The optimal MAP target may vary depending on the underlying cause of AKI: - **Sepsis-related AKI:** Higher MAP may be beneficial to counteract vasodilation and improve perfusion. - **Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS):** Vasoconstrictors like terlipressin are often used to increase MAP and improve renal perfusion. - **Hypovolemia-related AKI:** Fluid resuscitation may be required to restore MAP and intravascular volume. - A uniform MAP target is clinically imprecise due to the variability in patient conditions and disease mechanisms. ### 4. **Mechanistic Complexity** - Low MAP in cirrhotic patients can result from various factors, including: - **Hypovolemia:** Reduced circulating blood volume due to gastrointestinal bleeding, ascites, or diuretic use. - **Vasodilation:** Systemic vasodilation caused by cirrhosis-related hyperdynamic circulation. - **Cardiac dysfunction:** Reduced cardiac output in advanced liver disease. - Without detailed hemodynamic data (e.g., cardiac output, serum lactate, urine output), it is difficult to determine the primary cause of low MAP and guide appropriate treatment. ### 5. **Need for Patient Stratification** - More granular analysis is needed to understand how factors like portal hypertension, heart failure, or sepsis affect the relationship between MAP and AKI recovery in cirrhosis. - Patient-level variables, such as the use of vasopressors, renal replacement therapy, and MAP fluctuations, should be investigated to tailor management strategies. ### 6. **Safety Considerations** - While aiming for higher MAP may promote kidney recovery, it must be balanced against potential risks: - **Vasoconstrictor-related adverse events:** Excessive use of vasopressors can lead to ischemia in other organs. - **Fluid overload:** Aggressive fluid resuscitation may worsen ascites, pulmonary edema, or cardiac strain. - A balanced approach is essential to avoid exacerbating complications while optimizing MAP. ### 7. **Clinical Implications** - MAP is a valuable treatment target for cirrhotic patients with AKI, but it should not be applied as a rigid numeric goal. - Instead, MAP should be integrated into a **personalized, context-dependent framework** that considers the patient's underlying hemodynamic status, the cause of AKI, and the risks of interventions. ### 8. **Future Directions** - Further research is needed to: - Define the optimal MAP thresholds for specific subgroups of cirrhotic patients with AKI. - Investigate the role of vasopressors and fluid management strategies in balancing MAP optimization and safety. - Explore the impact of dynamic MAP fluctuations on kidney recovery and overall outcomes. ### Conclusion: In patients with cirrhosis and AKI, maintaining adequate MAP is crucial for kidney recovery; however, its application requires careful consideration of the underlying mechanisms, patient-specific factors, and potential risks associated with treatment strategies. A personalized approach, informed by detailed hemodynamic data and patient stratification, is essential for optimizing outcomes while minimizing complications.

The synergy of carvedilol and simvastatin

The synergy between carvedilol and simvastatin represents a promising multifaceted approach to managing portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis, particularly those who exhibit poor responses to traditional non-selective β-blockers (NSBBs). This combination leverages the complementary mechanisms of action of the two drugs to achieve improved outcomes in reducing portal pressure and enhancing vascular health. ### Mechanisms Underlying the Synergy: 1. **Carvedilol's Dual Action**: - Carvedilol is a NSBB with additional α1-adrenergic blocking properties. This dual action contributes to systemic vasodilation and reduces intrahepatic vascular resistance more effectively than traditional NSBBs like propranolol. - By lowering systemic vascular resistance and portal pressure, carvedilol provides a strong foundation for managing severe portal hypertension. 2. **Simvastatin's Vascular and Anti-inflammatory Effects**: - Simvastatin, a statin, improves endothelial function by increasing nitric oxide availability, which enhances vasodilation and reduces intrahepatic vascular resistance. - It also decreases inflammatory cytokines such as interleukin-6 (IL-6) and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1), mitigating systemic inflammation—a key driver of vascular dysfunction in cirrhosis. - Simvastatin reduces oxidative stress markers, further supporting vascular health. ### Clinical Evidence Supporting the Synergy: 1. **Study Design and Results**: - In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving 82 cirrhotic patients with high-risk varices and suboptimal hemodynamic responses to propranolol, the combination of carvedilol and simvastatin demonstrated superior efficacy in reducing hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) compared to carvedilol alone. - Patients receiving carvedilol and simvastatin showed a greater reduction in portal pressure over 4–6 weeks, highlighting the synergistic effect of the combination. 2. **Safety Profile**: - Despite concerns about hepatotoxicity and myopathy associated with statins, the combination of carvedilol and simvastatin was well tolerated in cirrhotic patients. - No significant increase in hepatic or muscle toxicity was observed, reinforcing the safety of this therapeutic strategy. ### Therapeutic Implications: 1. **Enhanced Portal Pressure Control**: - By targeting both systemic inflammation and intrahepatic vascular resistance, the carvedilol–simvastatin combination offers a more comprehensive approach to lowering portal pressure than NSBBs alone. 2. **Improved Vascular Health**: - The combination addresses endothelial dysfunction, oxidative stress, and inflammatory pathways, which are critical contributors to vascular complications in cirrhosis. 3. **Potential for Better Outcomes in High-Risk Patients**: - For patients with severe portal hypertension and poor responses to propranolol, this drug combination provides an alternative strategy that could reduce the risk of variceal bleeding and other complications. ### Future Directions: 1. **Validation of Long-Term Benefits**: - While the study demonstrates short-term hemodynamic improvements, further research is needed to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of this combination therapy, including its impact on survival, variceal bleeding, and liver-related morbidity. 2. **Broader Applications**: - The carvedilol–simvastatin synergy could potentially be explored in other settings of vascular dysfunction and systemic inflammation beyond cirrhosis. ### Conclusion: The carvedilol and simvastatin combination exemplifies a novel, synergistic approach to managing portal hypertension in cirrhotic patients. By integrating carvedilol's vasodilatory effects with simvastatin's vascular and anti-inflammatory benefits, this therapy offers enhanced efficacy and safety. It represents a promising advancement in the treatment of a major complication of cirrhosis, warranting further investigation to validate its long-term benefits and broader therapeutic potential.

DILI control compounds list: An analysis of FAERS data

The analysis of the DILI (drug-induced liver injury) control compounds list using FAERS (FDA Adverse Event Reporting System) data aimed to validate the consensus-driven list of DILI-positive and negative control drugs proposed by Segovia-Zafra et al. Here is a detailed breakdown of the study: ### **Study Aim** The primary goal of the analysis was to provide real-world validation of the proposed DILI control compounds list. This list was designed to categorize drugs based on their potential to cause liver injury (DILI-positive) or their lack of association with liver injury (DILI-negative). The study used FAERS data to assess the hepatotoxic potential of these drugs and to confirm the reliability of the list for use in in vitro model validation. --- ### **Methodology** 1. **Data Source**: Researchers utilized FAERS, a robust pharmacovigilance database containing reports of adverse drug reactions submitted between 2004 and 2024. 2. **Algorithms Used**: Multiple pharmacovigilance algorithms were applied to detect signals of liver injury: - **Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR)** - **Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR)** - **Information Component (IC)** - **Empirical Bayesian Geometric Mean (EBGM)** 3. **Analysis Focus**: The study analyzed the frequency and strength of liver injury signals for the drugs on the DILI control list, comparing DILI-positive and DILI-negative compounds. --- ### **Key Findings** 1. **Validation of DILI-Positive Drugs**: - Most DILI-positive drugs exhibited strong liver injury signals across all metrics, confirming their hepatotoxic potential. - **Isoniazid** showed the strongest association with liver injury, with a Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR) of 43.3 and an IC025 of 3.7, indicating a very high likelihood of DILI. 2. **Validation of DILI-Negative Drugs**: - Negative control compounds, such as **diphenhydramine** and **lidocaine**, had few or no reports of liver injury, supporting their classification as non-hepatotoxic. 3. **Data Gaps**: - Certain drugs, such as **troglitazone** and **isoproterenol**, had no available FAERS data. This was attributed to factors such as market withdrawal or limited clinical usage, which reduced the number of adverse event reports for these drugs. - These gaps highlight a limitation of spontaneous reporting systems like FAERS, as they rely on voluntary submissions and may not capture data for all drugs. --- ### **Conclusion** The FAERS-based analysis largely supports the proposed DILI control compounds list. The findings enhance confidence in the list's validity and its potential utility for in vitro model validation. However, the study also acknowledges limitations in FAERS data, such as underreporting and data gaps for certain drugs. To address these challenges and further strengthen the validation process, the authors recommend complementary studies using structured real-world datasets, such as electronic health records or clinical trial data. --- ### **Implications** The study reinforces the utility of pharmacovigilance databases like FAERS in evaluating drug safety. The validated DILI control compounds list can serve as a reliable reference for researchers developing predictive models of hepatotoxicity, ultimately improving drug safety assessments and reducing the risk of liver injury in patients.

Nucleos(t)ide analogue cessation and HBV flare

Nucleos(t)ide analogue (NA) cessation in chronic hepatitis B (CHB) infection is a complex process that can lead to hepatitis flares, characterized by a rise in alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels and, in severe cases, hepatic decompensation. The natural history following NA cessation is influenced by various factors, including patient characteristics, virological markers, and monitoring practices. Below is a detailed explanation based on the context: ### 1. **Hepatitis Flares After NA Cessation** - **Incidence Rates**: Hepatitis flares are common after NA cessation, but the reported incidence varies widely across studies. For example: - The RETRACT-B study reported lower flare rates (18% at 1 year and 33% at 5 years) compared to earlier single-center studies (29% at 1 year and 59% at 5 years). This discrepancy may be due to differences in follow-up frequency and monitoring practices. - **Severity**: Flares can range from mild ALT elevations to severe liver injury leading to hepatic decompensation. The risk of severe flares is higher in patients with cirrhosis or advanced liver disease. ### 2. **Predictors of Hepatitis Flares** Several factors have been identified as predictors of hepatitis flares after NA cessation: - **End-of-Treatment HBsAg Levels**: High HBsAg levels (>1,000 IU/ml) have been associated with ALT flares, although prior studies have not consistently linked these levels to flare severity. This inconsistency highlights the need for further investigation. - **HBV DNA Kinetics**: Rapid surges in HBV DNA levels after NA cessation, rather than absolute HBV DNA levels, are considered more predictive of severe flares. This suggests that viral replication dynamics play a critical role in flare risk. - **HBeAg Status**: HBeAg-positive patients may have a higher risk of flares due to active viral replication, though data on this are inconsistent. - **Cirrhosis**: Patients with cirrhosis are at increased risk of severe flares and hepatic decompensation, underscoring the importance of careful monitoring. ### 3. **Monitoring Practices** - The frequency and rigor of post-cessation monitoring significantly impact flare detection and management. Centers with less frequent follow-up may report lower flare rates, potentially missing milder cases or early signs of severe flares. - Regular monitoring of ALT, HBV DNA, and clinical status is crucial to identify and manage flares early, especially in high-risk patients. ### 4. **Need for Improved Risk Prediction Models** - Current models predicting flare risk after NA cessation are limited by inconsistencies in data and reliance on static markers like HBsAg levels. Incorporating HBV DNA kinetics into prediction models could improve accuracy and help identify patients at higher risk for severe flares. - Future studies should focus on developing dynamic models that account for viral replication patterns and host factors to guide clinical decision-making. ### 5. **Clinical Implications** - **Patient Selection**: Not all patients are suitable for NA cessation. Careful patient selection based on virological and clinical criteria is essential to minimize flare risk. - **Management of Flares**: For patients experiencing flares, restarting NA therapy or initiating other interventions may be necessary to prevent progression to liver failure. - **Education and Counseling**: Patients should be educated about the potential risks of NA cessation and the importance of adherence to follow-up schedules. ### 6. **Research Gaps** - There is a need for further studies to clarify the relationship between HBsAg levels and flare severity, as well as the role of HBeAg status and cirrhosis in flare risk. - Standardized protocols for monitoring and managing flares across centers could help reduce discrepancies in reported flare rates and outcomes. In summary, NA cessation in CHB patients carries a significant risk of hepatitis flares, with severity influenced by virological, clinical, and monitoring factors. Future research should focus on improving risk prediction models, refining patient selection criteria, and standardizing post-cessation monitoring practices to optimize outcomes.

Paediatric acute hepatitis of unknown origin (PAHUO)

### Paediatric Acute Hepatitis of Unknown Origin (PAHUO) #### Overview: Paediatric Acute Hepatitis of Unknown Origin (PAHUO) refers to cases of acute liver inflammation in children where no known cause—such as viral hepatitis (A, B, C, D, E), toxins, metabolic disorders, or autoimmune diseases—can be identified. This condition gained global attention in 2022 when clusters of cases were reported in several countries, particularly in Europe and the United States. It poses a significant challenge due to its unknown etiology and potential severity, including cases requiring liver transplantation. --- #### Key Findings from the 2022 Spanish Outbreak: Research into PAHUO during the Spanish outbreak in 2022 provided new insights into potential genetic and immunological factors that may contribute to the disease. These findings include: 1. **Genetic Susceptibility:** - A study of 40 affected children revealed a strong association with specific human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles, particularly **HLA-DRB1*04** (subtypes *04:01, *04:03, and *04:07). - These alleles were present in **84.6% of PAHUO patients**, compared to only **34% of healthy controls**, indicating a potential immunogenetic predisposition. 2. **Autoimmune Basis:** - The shared epitope theory suggests that certain HLA alleles (*DRB1*01, *04, *10, *15, and *14:02) are linked to autoimmune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis and lupus. - This raises the possibility that PAHUO may have an autoimmune mechanism, where the immune system mistakenly attacks the liver. 3. **Viral Triggers:** - Viral infections were frequently detected in PAHUO cases, suggesting that viruses might act as environmental triggers for the disease. Key viruses identified include: - **Adenovirus:** Found in 42.8% of cases. - **Adeno-associated virus (AAV):** Present in 19% of cases. - **Cytomegalovirus (CMV)** and **Epstein-Barr virus (EBV):** Also detected in some patients. - These infections may provoke an autoimmune-like response in genetically predisposed children, leading to liver damage. --- #### Clinical Presentation: Children with PAHUO typically present with: - **Symptoms:** Jaundice, abdominal pain, vomiting, fatigue, diarrhea, and pale stools. - **Laboratory Findings:** Elevated liver enzymes (ALT, AST), hyperbilirubinemia, and in severe cases, coagulopathy. - **Severity:** Some cases progress to acute liver failure, requiring hospitalization and, in rare instances, liver transplantation. --- #### Diagnosis and Challenges: - **Exclusion of Known Causes:** Diagnosis of PAHUO is made by ruling out common causes of hepatitis, including viral infections (hepatitis A-E), toxins, drugs, metabolic disorders, and autoimmune hepatitis. - **Immunological and Genetic Testing:** Emerging research suggests testing for HLA alleles and autoimmune markers may help identify at-risk children. --- #### Treatment: Currently, there is no specific treatment for PAHUO. Management focuses on: - **Supportive Care:** Monitoring liver function, managing symptoms, and preventing complications. - **Immunosuppressive Therapy:** If autoimmune mechanisms are suspected, corticosteroids or other immunosuppressants may be considered. - **Liver Transplantation:** In cases of acute liver failure. --- ### Autoimmune Hepatitis in Paediatric Age Groups #### Definition: Autoimmune hepatitis (AIH) is a chronic inflammatory liver disease caused by the immune system attacking the liver tissue. It is characterized by elevated liver enzymes, autoantibodies, and histological evidence of inflammation. #### Causes: - **Genetic Factors:** Certain HLA alleles, such as DRB1*03 and DRB1*04, are associated with AIH. - **Environmental Triggers:** Viral infections, toxins, or drugs may initiate autoimmune responses in genetically predisposed children. #### Symptoms: - Jaundice, fatigue, abdominal pain, nausea, and growth failure. - In severe cases, cirrhosis or acute liver failure may develop. #### Diagnosis: - Presence of autoantibodies (ANA, SMA, anti-LKM1). - Elevated liver enzymes (ALT, AST) and immunoglobulin G (IgG). - Liver biopsy showing interface hepatitis. #### Treatment: - **First-line Therapy:** Corticosteroids (e.g., prednisone) to suppress the immune response. - **Maintenance Therapy:** Azathioprine or other immunosuppressants. - **Liver Transplantation:** For cases with advanced liver damage. --- ### PAHUO and New Autoimmune Hepatitis 1. **PAHUO and Autoimmune Hepatitis Connection:** - The genetic predisposition observed in PAHUO (e.g., HLA-DRB1*04 alleles) overlaps with known autoimmune diseases, suggesting a potential autoimmune component in PAHUO. - Viral infections may act as triggers, initiating immune-mediated damage to the liver. 2. **Emerging Concept of "New Autoimmune Hepatitis":** - PAHUO might represent a novel form of autoimmune hepatitis triggered by viral infections in genetically susceptible children. - Unlike traditional autoimmune hepatitis, PAHUO is acute and may lack the classic autoantibody profile. 3. **Implications for Research and Treatment:** - Further studies are needed to confirm the autoimmune basis of PAHUO and its relationship to HLA alleles. - If confirmed, immunosuppressive therapy could become a key treatment strategy for PAHUO. --- ### Conclusion: PAHUO is a complex and poorly understood condition affecting children, with emerging evidence pointing to genetic and autoimmune mechanisms potentially triggered by viral infections. The discovery of HLA associations and shared epitopes linked to autoimmune diseases opens new avenues for understanding and managing this condition. Continued global research is essential to validate these findings, improve diagnostic tools, and develop targeted therapies.

Sequential therapy with antisense oligonucleotide and immune modulator as HBV cure

Sequential therapy combining antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) and immune modulators represents a promising strategy to achieve a functional cure for chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV). Below, I will explain each component, the significance of this approach, and how it addresses the limitations of current therapies: --- ### **1. What is an Antisense Oligonucleotide (ASO)?** Antisense oligonucleotides are short, synthetic strands of nucleic acids designed to bind specifically to messenger RNA (mRNA) sequences in cells. By binding to target mRNA, ASOs can block its translation into proteins or promote its degradation, effectively silencing gene expression. In the context of HBV, the ASO **bepirovirsen** specifically targets the HBV mRNA responsible for producing viral proteins, including hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). This leads to a reduction in viral antigen levels, which is a critical step in disrupting the virus's ability to evade the immune system. --- ### **2. What is an Immune Modulator?** Immune modulators are therapies that enhance or regulate the immune system's ability to fight infections or diseases. In HBV treatment, **pegylated interferon-alpha (PegIFN)** is an example of an immune modulator. PegIFN works by: - Activating immune cells such as cytotoxic T cells and natural killer (NK) cells. - Promoting antiviral mechanisms that inhibit HBV replication. - Enhancing the immune system's ability to clear infected cells. PegIFN is particularly effective when the immune system is given a "head start," such as through prior reduction of viral antigens using ASOs. --- ### **3. Definition of HBV Cure** A functional cure for HBV is defined as: - Durable loss of hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) from the bloodstream. - Undetectable HBV DNA levels. - No need for lifelong antiviral therapy. This does not necessarily mean complete eradication of the virus but rather achieving sustained remission where the immune system can control the infection without continuous medical intervention. --- ### **4. Limitations of Present Therapies for HBV Cure** Current therapies for HBV, such as nucleos(t)ide analogs (NAs) and PegIFN monotherapy, have significant limitations: - **Nucleos(t)ide Analogs (NAs):** These suppress HBV replication but do not directly target viral antigens like HBsAg. They rarely lead to HBsAg clearance and require lifelong treatment. - **PegIFN Monotherapy:** Although PegIFN can achieve HBsAg loss in a subset of patients, its efficacy is limited, especially in patients with high levels of HBsAg. Relapse rates after treatment discontinuation are high. - **Immune Exhaustion:** Chronic HBV infection is characterized by immune tolerance or exhaustion due to persistent high levels of HBsAg. This makes it difficult for the immune system to mount an effective response. --- ### **5. How Sequential Therapy Helps** The sequential therapy combining **bepirovirsen** and **PegIFN** addresses these limitations by leveraging the complementary mechanisms of the two agents: #### **Step 1: Reduction of Viral Antigens with Bepirovirsen** - Bepirovirsen lowers HBsAg and other viral antigens in the bloodstream by targeting HBV mRNA. - This reduction in antigen levels alleviates immune tolerance and rejuvenates exhausted immune cells, creating an environment where the immune system can respond more effectively. #### **Step 2: Immune Boost with PegIFN** - After the antigen load is reduced, PegIFN is introduced to stimulate the immune system and promote clearance of infected cells and residual virus. - PegIFN works more effectively in patients with low HBsAg levels, as shown in real-world data and clinical studies. #### **Clinical Results from Sequential Therapy** - In the B-Together trial, among patients who achieved low or undetectable HBsAg and HBV DNA levels after bepirovirsen treatment, **59% maintained viral suppression** after 24 weeks of subsequent PegIFN therapy. - This sustained response rate is higher than what is typically achieved with PegIFN monotherapy, highlighting the synergistic effect of sequential treatment. --- ### **6. Mechanistic Complementarity** The success of sequential therapy lies in the complementary mechanisms of action: - **Bepirovirsen:** Targets viral replication and antigen production, reducing immune suppression caused by persistent HBsAg. - **PegIFN:** Activates immune pathways to clear the virus and infected cells, promoting long-term control of HBV. Together, these agents create a therapeutic strategy that addresses both viral suppression and immune restoration, which are critical for achieving a functional cure. --- ### **7. Implications for Cure Research** Sequential therapy supports the paradigm that lowering the antigen load is a prerequisite for successful immune-mediated HBV clearance. This approach mirrors the "inactive carrier state," where antigen levels are minimal, allowing the immune system to maintain control over the infection. It also opens new avenues for treating other chronic viral infections characterized by immune exhaustion. --- ### **8. Limitations and Future Directions** While promising, this approach has limitations: - **Study Design Challenges:** The lack of a monotherapy control arm in trials makes it difficult to quantify PegIFN's incremental benefit over ASO therapy alone. - **Safety Concerns:** Both bepirovirsen and PegIFN have manageable side effects, but their combined use requires careful monitoring. - **Real-World Validation:** Larger phase 3 trials and real-world studies are needed to confirm the findings and optimize dosing intervals for maximal immune restoration. Future research should focus on refining the sequential therapy protocol, exploring its applicability to broader patient populations, and adapting the model to other chronic viral infections. --- ### **9. Key Conclusion** Sequential therapy combining **bepirovirsen** (to reduce viral antigens) and **PegIFN** (to boost immune clearance) represents a significant step forward in HBV cure research. By addressing both immune exhaustion and viral persistence, this strategy offers hope for achieving sustained remission and a functional cure for chronic HBV infection.

MetALD: Position statement by an expert panel

The expert position statement on Metabolic dysfunction- and Alcohol-related Liver Disease (MetALD) provides a comprehensive overview of the definition, diagnosis, and management of MetALD within the newly updated 2023 classification of steatotic liver diseases (SLD). Here are the key points highlighted in the paper: ### 1. **Purpose and Context** The statement aims to clarify the terminology, diagnostic criteria, and management strategies for MetALD, a subtype of liver disease that arises from the combined impact of metabolic dysfunction and alcohol consumption. This is part of the broader reclassification of steatotic liver diseases (SLD) introduced in 2023. ### 2. **Redefinition of Steatotic Liver Diseases (SLD)** The updated nomenclature divides SLD into three categories: - **Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD)**: Primarily driven by metabolic dysfunction. - **MetALD**: Liver disease resulting from both metabolic dysfunction and alcohol consumption. - **Alcohol-related liver disease (ALD)**: Liver disease predominantly caused by alcohol intake. This framework acknowledges the overlapping spectra of these conditions, particularly between MASLD and ALD. ### 3. **Importance of Alcohol History** A thorough assessment of alcohol consumption is essential for diagnosing MetALD. Both recent and lifetime alcohol intake must be evaluated to distinguish MetALD from MASLD and ALD. Tools like the AUDIT-C questionnaire and biomarkers such as phosphatidylethanol (PEth) are recommended to complement clinical history. ### 4. **Alcohol Intake Thresholds** The paper endorses specific thresholds for alcohol consumption to define MetALD: - **Women**: 140–350 grams per week. - **Men**: 210–420 grams per week. These thresholds help align alcohol exposure with metabolic dysfunction criteria. ### 5. **Challenges in Alcohol Quantification** Accurate reporting of alcohol use is complicated by factors such as stigma, memory errors, and differing definitions of "standard drinks" across regions. These challenges can lead to misclassification of MetALD. ### 6. **Role of Biomarkers** Phosphatidylethanol (PEth) is emphasized as a reliable biomarker for recent alcohol intake. It can detect alcohol use for up to six weeks and differentiate MetALD from MASLD and ALD. ### 7. **Histopathological Features** While MASLD and ALD share overlapping histological patterns, specific features such as neutrophilic infiltration and Mallory-Denk bodies are more characteristic of alcohol-related liver injury. ### 8. **Fibrosis Progression** Fibrosis progresses more rapidly in MetALD and ALD compared to MASLD. Fibrosis stage is the strongest predictor of mortality and liver-related outcomes. ### 9. **Interplay with Metabolic Syndrome** Alcohol consumption exacerbates metabolic syndrome components—such as hypertension, hypertriglyceridemia, and hyperglycemia—further worsening liver injury in MetALD. ### 10. **Alcohol’s Dual Role** Alcohol contributes to liver injury in two ways: - **Direct hepatotoxicity**: Damage caused by alcohol itself. - **Indirect effects**: Alcohol promotes obesity, insulin resistance, and poor metabolic health, which aggravate liver dysfunction. ### 11. **Screening Recommendations** The paper recommends screening all individuals with suspected SLD for alcohol use and alcohol use disorder (AUD) using validated tools like AUDIT or AUDIT-C to ensure accurate classification under the new framework. ### 12. **Attributable Risk of Alcohol** Alcohol is a significant contributor to liver-related morbidity and mortality worldwide. Even moderate alcohol consumption increases the risk of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. ### 13. **Synergistic Risk with Obesity and Diabetes** The combination of alcohol use and metabolic dysfunction (e.g., obesity or type 2 diabetes mellitus) exponentially increases the risk of liver fibrosis and cirrhosis. ### 14. **Complexity of Metabolic Criteria** Alcohol influences metabolic parameters such as blood pressure, triglycerides, and glucose levels, complicating the diagnosis of MASLD or MetALD. Careful interpretation is required to avoid misclassification. ### 15. **Longitudinal Assessment** Periodic reassessment of alcohol consumption and metabolic risk factors is recommended, especially after lifestyle changes or treatments, to better predict disease progression. ### 16. **Public Health Implications** The paper emphasizes that there is no "safe" level of alcohol consumption for liver health. Population-level strategies to reduce alcohol use can significantly decrease the burden of alcohol-related liver disease. ### 17. **Clinical Management of MetALD** MetALD requires a holistic management approach that addresses both metabolic dysfunction and alcohol consumption. Recommended strategies include: - **Lifestyle modification**: Diet, exercise, and alcohol cessation. - **Pharmacotherapy**: Medications targeting metabolic dysfunction or alcohol use disorder. - **Behavioral interventions**: Counseling and support for alcohol cessation. ### 18. **Non-Invasive Fibrosis Assessment** Non-invasive fibrosis tests are advocated for early identification of advanced liver disease, particularly in patients with MetALD or heavy alcohol use. ### 19. **Research Priorities** Further studies are needed to: - Quantify the individual contributions of alcohol and metabolic dysfunction to fibrosis progression. - Validate diagnostic criteria for MetALD across diverse populations. ### 20. **Conclusion** MetALD represents a critical intersection between metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related liver injury. Accurate diagnosis, holistic management, and refined classification under the new steatotic liver disease framework can improve prognosis and guide future therapeutic strategies. This position statement underscores the importance of recognizing MetALD as a distinct entity within the broader spectrum of liver diseases, offering a pathway for more precise diagnosis and better-targeted treatments.

EASL-ERN Clinical Practice Guidelines on Wilson’s Disease

As of October 2023, the European Association for the Study of the Liver (EASL) and the European Reference Network (ERN) for Rare Liver Diseases have provided Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) for Wilson’s Disease (WD) to guide healthcare professionals in diagnosing, managing, and treating this rare genetic disorder. Below is a detailed summary of the key recommendations and insights from these guidelines: --- ### **1. Overview of Wilson’s Disease** - **Definition**: Wilson’s Disease is an autosomal recessive disorder caused by mutations in the ATP7B gene, leading to impaired copper metabolism and accumulation in the liver, brain, and other organs. - **Prevalence**: Approximately 1 in 30,000–50,000 individuals globally, with regional differences in common mutations. - **Clinical Manifestations**: Hepatic, neurological, and psychiatric symptoms dominate, with variable severity. --- ### **2. Diagnosis** #### **Clinical and Biochemical Evaluation** - **Kayser–Fleischer Rings**: A hallmark sign, present in ~95% of neurological cases and ~50% of hepatic cases, detected via slit-lamp examination. - **Serum Ceruloplasmin**: Typically <20 mg/dL, but not specific; low levels are supportive of WD. - **24-hour Urinary Copper Excretion**: Values >100 µg/24h are diagnostic. - **Liver Copper Content**: >250 µg/g dry weight on biopsy confirms diagnosis. - **Relative Exchangeable Copper (REC)**: >15% strongly supports WD diagnosis, especially in acute liver failure cases. #### **Genetic Testing** - **ATP7B Gene Analysis**: Recommended for confirmation, especially when biochemical tests are inconclusive. Next-generation sequencing identifies >85% of pathogenic mutations. - **Family Screening**: First-degree relatives should undergo ceruloplasmin, urinary copper, and genetic testing due to a 25% risk of WD. #### **Diagnostic Scoring** - **Leipzig Score**: A structured scoring system integrating clinical, biochemical, and genetic findings to confirm WD. #### **Imaging** - **Brain MRI**: Useful for neurological WD; findings include T2 hyperintensities in the basal ganglia and the “face of the giant panda” sign. - **Liver Biopsy**: Confirms copper overload but may yield false negatives due to uneven copper distribution. --- ### **3. Management** #### **Pharmacological Treatment** - **Chelating Agents**: - **D-Penicillamine**: Promotes copper excretion; first-line therapy for hepatic WD. - **Trientine**: An alternative chelator with fewer side effects. - **Zinc Salts**: Blocks intestinal copper absorption; suitable for maintenance therapy or asymptomatic cases. - **Combination Therapy**: In some cases, chelators and zinc may be combined under expert supervision. #### **Liver Transplantation** - **Indications**: - Wilsonian acute liver failure (ALF). - End-stage cirrhosis unresponsive to medical therapy. - **Outcome**: Effectively cures copper metabolism abnormalities and prevents further organ damage. #### **Neurological and Psychiatric Management** - **Unified Wilson’s Disease Rating Scale (UWDRS)**: Recommended for monitoring neurological severity in adults and children >10 years old. - **Psychiatric Care**: Depression, anxiety, and behavioral changes should be addressed with appropriate therapy. #### **Monitoring Therapy** - Regular follow-up is crucial to ensure: - Adequate copper balance (avoiding over- or under-treatment). - Compliance with lifelong treatment. - Monitoring of urinary copper levels and liver enzymes. --- ### **4. Special Considerations** #### **Acute Liver Failure (ALF)** - Diagnostic tests like serum ceruloplasmin and urinary copper may be less reliable in ALF. Genetic testing and relative exchangeable copper are preferred for accuracy. - Coombs-negative hemolysis, high bilirubin, low alkaline phosphatase, and modest ALT/AST elevations are characteristic laboratory findings. #### **Pediatric Presentation** - In children, WD may present as asymptomatic transaminase elevation, hepatomegaly, or acute hepatitis. Neurological symptoms are rare but may include subtle tremor or ataxia. #### **Differential Diagnosis** - WD should be distinguished from autoimmune hepatitis, viral hepatitis, metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), hemochromatosis, alpha-1 antitrypsin deficiency, and cholestatic liver diseases. --- ### **5. Multidisciplinary Approach** - **Team Involvement**: Management requires collaboration among hepatologists, neurologists, psychiatrists, geneticists, and dietitians. - **Family Support**: Genetic counseling and psychological support for patients and families are essential. --- ### **6. Key Recommendations** - **Early Diagnosis**: Prioritize early recognition using the Leipzig score, biochemical tests, and genetic testing to prevent irreversible organ damage. - **Lifelong Treatment**: Ensure adherence to pharmacological therapy and monitoring to improve survival and quality of life. - **Family Screening**: Early detection in siblings and first-degree relatives prevents disease progression. - **Liver Transplantation**: Consider transplantation in cases of acute liver failure or end-stage liver disease. --- ### **Conclusion** The EASL-ERN Clinical Practice Guidelines emphasize the importance of early diagnosis, structured management, and lifelong treatment of Wilson’s Disease to prevent irreversible hepatic and neurological damage. A multidisciplinary approach and family screening are crucial to optimizing outcomes and improving the quality of life for affected individuals. For further details, refer to the full EASL-ERN guidelines or consult with specialists in rare liver diseases.

Impact of sarcopenia and frailty on decompensated liver disease

Sarcopenia and frailty are both clinical conditions that can significantly influence the progression and outcomes of liver diseases, including decompensated cirrhosis. Below is a detailed explanation of each condition and their respective impacts on decompensated liver disease: ### **Sarcopenia**: Sarcopenia refers to the loss of skeletal muscle mass and function, which is commonly observed in patients with chronic liver disease, including cirrhosis. It is often assessed using imaging techniques such as CT scans, particularly at the L3 vertebral level, to measure muscle mass. #### **Impact on Decompensated Liver Disease**: - **Prevalence**: Sarcopenia is highly prevalent in patients with cirrhosis, ranging from 8% to 63% in compensated cirrhosis according to the systematic review. - **Progression to Decompensation**: The systematic review found that sarcopenia, while frequent in compensated cirrhosis, did not consistently predict the risk of progression to decompensated liver disease or mortality, especially in patients who had not experienced prior decompensation at baseline. - **Possible Mechanisms**: Sarcopenia may contribute to worse outcomes in cirrhosis through reduced physical strength, impaired metabolism, and systemic inflammation. However, its independent role in predicting decompensation remains unclear. - **Clinical Implications**: Sarcopenia might be a contributing factor in overall disease burden but does not appear to be a reliable standalone prognostic marker for decompensation or mortality. ### **Frailty**: Frailty is a condition characterized by reduced physiological reserve and increased vulnerability to stressors. In the context of liver disease, frailty is commonly assessed using tools like the Liver Frailty Index, which evaluates physical performance, grip strength, and other markers of functional decline. #### **Impact on Decompensated Liver Disease**: - **Prevalence**: Frailty is also prevalent in patients with cirrhosis, though the systematic review included fewer studies on frailty (four studies, 552 patients). - **Strong Association with Poor Outcomes**: Unlike sarcopenia, frailty demonstrated a stronger and more consistent link to poor outcomes in cirrhosis. Two of the four studies reviewed reported a significantly higher risk of decompensation and mortality among frail patients. - **Mechanisms**: Frailty reflects a broader systemic dysfunction, including physical weakness, malnutrition, and reduced ability to withstand the physiological stress of cirrhosis. This makes frail patients more susceptible to complications like infections, hepatic encephalopathy, and other features of decompensated cirrhosis. - **Prognostic Value**: Frailty appears to be a more reliable predictor of disease progression, decompensation, and mortality compared to sarcopenia. ### **Key Differences Between Sarcopenia and Frailty**: - **Prognostic Value**: Frailty has a stronger association with adverse outcomes in cirrhosis compared to sarcopenia. - **Scope**: Sarcopenia focuses on muscle loss, whereas frailty encompasses a broader decline in physical and functional health. - **Measurement Tools**: Sarcopenia is typically assessed via imaging, while frailty is evaluated using functional indices like the Liver Frailty Index. ### **Conclusion**: While sarcopenia is common in patients with compensated cirrhosis, it may not independently predict disease progression to decompensated cirrhosis or mortality. Frailty, on the other hand, is a stronger prognostic factor for poor outcomes, including decompensation and death. Both conditions highlight the importance of assessing physical and functional health in cirrhosis patients, but frailty appears to have greater clinical relevance in predicting disease worsening. ### **Future Directions**: The systematic review emphasized the need for large, prospective, multicenter studies to better understand how sarcopenia and frailty interact and jointly influence the risk of first decompensation in cirrhosis patients. These studies could help refine prognostic models and improve clinical management strategies for patients with liver disease.

Type-1, -2, and -3 inflammation and severity of decompensated cirrhosis

Type-1, Type-2, and Type-3 inflammation are classifications of immune responses that represent distinct biological pathways activated in response to different types of stimuli. These inflammation types play critical roles in the progression and severity of acutely decompensated cirrhosis (ADC) and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). Below is a detailed explanation of these inflammation types, their roles in cirrhosis, and how they influence disease severity: --- ### **Type-1 Inflammation** **Definition:** Type-1 inflammation is primarily associated with antiviral and antibacterial defense mechanisms. It involves immune responses aimed at clearing intracellular pathogens, such as viruses and certain bacteria. **Key Markers:** - **IFN-γ (Interferon-gamma):** A cytokine critical for antiviral defense and intracellular bacterial clearance. - **IL-1β (Interleukin-1 beta):** A pro-inflammatory cytokine involved in acute immune activation. - **IgG (Immunoglobulin G):** An antibody that supports pathogen neutralization. **Role in ADC and ACLF:** - **Suppression:** In patients with ADC, type-1 inflammation is suppressed as disease severity progresses. IFN-γ levels decrease significantly, impairing the ability to fight viral infections (e.g., hepatitis B virus [HBV] flares) and intracellular bacterial infections. - **Immune Dysregulation:** Reduced IFN-γ and depletion of T-cells (especially CD3+ and CD4+ T-cells) lead to immune exhaustion and increased susceptibility to secondary infections, which are common in ACLF patients. - **Impact on Prognosis:** The suppression of type-1 inflammation contributes to poor antiviral control and worsens outcomes, including increased mortality risk. --- ### **Type-2 Inflammation** **Definition:** Type-2 inflammation is primarily involved in tissue repair and defense against extracellular parasites (e.g., helminths). It plays a role in maintaining epithelial barrier integrity and promoting wound healing. **Key Markers:** - **IL-25 (Interleukin-25):** An initiating cytokine that activates type-2 responses. - **IL-13 (Interleukin-13):** An effector cytokine that supports tissue repair. - **IL-4 (Interleukin-4):** A cytokine involved in regulating immune responses and promoting anti-inflammatory effects. **Role in ADC and ACLF:** - **Dysregulation:** In ADC patients, type-2 inflammation becomes dysregulated. IL-25 levels steadily rise, but IL-13 levels decline at the ACLF stage, indicating incomplete or defective tissue repair mechanisms. - **Barrier Dysfunction:** The paradoxical rise in IL-25 alongside reduced IL-13 suggests impaired epithelial barrier integrity, contributing to “leaky gut” syndrome. This allows bacterial translocation and systemic inflammation, exacerbating liver damage. - **Progression:** Dysregulated type-2 responses are linked to tissue repair failure, further driving disease progression toward ACLF. --- ### **Type-3 Inflammation** **Definition:** Type-3 inflammation is associated with responses to extracellular pathogens, such as bacteria and fungi, and is characterized by sustained pro-inflammatory activation. **Key Markers:** - **IL-6 (Interleukin-6):** A central cytokine driving systemic inflammation. - **IL-23 (Interleukin-23):** A cytokine involved in promoting chronic inflammation. - **IL-22 (Interleukin-22):** A cytokine that supports epithelial defense but also contributes to inflammation. - **MIP-3α (Macrophage Inflammatory Protein-3 alpha):** A chemokine involved in recruiting immune cells to sites of infection. **Role in ADC and ACLF:** - **Hyperactivation:** Type-3 inflammation becomes progressively hyperactivated as ADC severity increases. Levels of IL-6, IL-23, and IL-22 rise sharply and peak in ACLF patients. - **Systemic Inflammation:** Excessive type-3 activation drives systemic immune activation, leading to further organ damage and worsening liver function. - **Mortality Risk:** Elevated IL-6 and IL-22 levels strongly correlate with short-term mortality (28-day mortality), highlighting their role in predicting poor outcomes. --- ### **Acutely Severe Decompensated Cirrhosis (ADC)** **Definition:** Acutely decompensated cirrhosis refers to the sudden worsening of liver function in patients with chronic liver disease. This condition is characterized by complications such as jaundice, ascites (fluid accumulation in the abdomen), hepatic encephalopathy (brain dysfunction due to liver failure), and gastrointestinal bleeding. **Stages of ADC Severity:** 1. **No Organ Dysfunction (No-OD):** Mild stage with preserved organ function. 2. **Organ Dysfunction (OD):** Intermediate stage with partial impairment of organ function. 3. **Organ Failure (OF) Without ACLF:** Severe stage with significant organ failure but not meeting ACLF criteria. 4. **ACLF (Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure):** The most severe stage, characterized by multi-organ failure, systemic inflammation, and high short-term mortality. **Systemic Inflammation in ADC:** - Systemic inflammation is a hallmark of ADC and drives its progression toward ACLF. - Immune dysregulation, characterized by neutrophilia (high neutrophil count), lymphopenia (low lymphocyte count), and altered cytokine levels, contributes to worsening liver function and organ failure. - Inflammation occurs independently of clinical precipitants like infections or alcohol-related injury, indicating intrinsic immune abnormalities. --- ### **How Type-1, Type-2, and Type-3 Inflammation Work in Cirrhosis** 1. **Type-1 Suppression:** - Reduced IFN-γ and T-cell depletion impair the clearance of intracellular pathogens (e.g., HBV), increasing susceptibility to secondary infections. - This contributes to immune exhaustion and progression toward ACLF. 2. **Type-2 Dysregulation:** - Elevated IL-25 and reduced IL-13 reflect defective tissue repair signaling, leading to epithelial barrier dysfunction (e.g., “leaky gut”). - Bacterial translocation and systemic inflammation exacerbate liver damage and promote disease progression. 3. **Type-3 Hyperactivation:** - Excess IL-6, IL-23, and IL-22 drive chronic systemic inflammation, leading to further organ damage. - These cytokines correlate strongly with disease severity and short-term mortality, making them critical markers for predicting outcomes. --- ### **Key Findings and Implications** - **Independent Predictors of Progression:** Neutrophilia, lymphopenia, decreased IFN-γ, elevated IL-25, IL-6, IL-22, and sCD163 were identified as independent predictors of progression from organ dysfunction (OD) to ACLF. - **Risk of Organ Failure:** Elevated white blood cell and neutrophil counts, alongside higher levels of IL-25, IL-23, and IL-22, were strongly associated with transition to organ failure and ACLF. - **28-Day Mortality:** Cytokines like IL-6, IL-22, MIP-3α, and sCD163 were elevated in patients who died within 28 days, while lymphocyte and T-cell counts were lower, highlighting their predictive power for short-term mortality. --- ### **Conclusion** The severity of acutely decompensated cirrhosis is characterized by a triad of immune responses: type-1 suppression, type-2 dysregulation, and type-3 hyperactivation. These inflammatory signatures are independent of precipitating events (e.g., infection, alcohol injury) and serve as potential biomarkers for early prediction of ACLF risk. Understanding these mechanisms can guide the development of immunomodulatory therapies aimed at improving outcomes in ADC and ACLF patients.

Systemic Inflammatory Index, TIPS and long term mortality

**Systemic Inflammatory Index (SII):** The Systemic Inflammatory Index (SII) is a biomarker that reflects systemic inflammation by combining platelet, neutrophil, and lymphocyte counts into a single formula. It is calculated as: **SII = (Platelet count × Neutrophil count) / Lymphocyte count** SII captures the balance between pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory components in the body. Elevated SII values indicate heightened systemic inflammatory activation, which is often associated with poor clinical outcomes, particularly in conditions like cirrhosis, cancer, and cardiovascular diseases. In the context of cirrhosis, elevated SII reflects a state of immune dysregulation and inflammation that exacerbates liver deterioration and contributes to mortality. --- **Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS):** TIPS is a minimally invasive procedure used to treat complications of portal hypertension, such as variceal bleeding, refractory ascites, and hepatorenal syndrome, in patients with advanced liver disease (cirrhosis). The procedure involves creating a shunt between the portal vein and hepatic vein to reduce portal pressure. While TIPS is effective in managing portal hypertension-related complications, it carries risks such as hepatic encephalopathy and high long-term mortality due to the underlying liver dysfunction and systemic effects. --- **Short-Term and Long-Term Mortality Associated with TIPS:** 1. **Short-Term Mortality (≤12 months):** - The study found that the 6-month mortality rate was **4.8%**, and the 12-month mortality rate was **7.6%**. - Early mortality is primarily driven by factors such as liver failure, gastrointestinal bleeding, and hepatorenal syndrome. - Inflammatory markers like SII and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were strong predictors of early mortality, indicating that systemic inflammation plays a critical role in short-term outcomes. 2. **Long-Term Mortality (>12 months):** - The 18-month mortality rate was **10.8%**. - Long-term mortality is influenced by the progressive deterioration of liver function and systemic complications. Over time, nutritional depletion (as assessed by the Prognostic Nutritional Index, PNI) becomes a stronger predictor of mortality, highlighting the interplay between inflammation and malnutrition in cirrhotic patients. - The study demonstrated that the predictive accuracy of SII remains robust in long-term mortality prediction when combined with age and the Child-Pugh score in Nomogram 2. --- **How SII Helps Identify Long-Term Mortality After TIPS:** SII is a powerful prognostic marker because it reflects systemic inflammatory activation, which worsens liver function and contributes to multi-organ failure in cirrhotic patients. The study identified SII as an independent predictor of 18-month mortality post-TIPS, alongside age and the Child-Pugh score. Here's how SII contributes to long-term mortality prediction: 1. **Mechanistic Role:** - Elevated SII indicates an imbalance in platelet, neutrophil, and lymphocyte counts, signifying heightened systemic inflammation. This inflammatory state accelerates hepatic deterioration and worsens outcomes in cirrhotic patients. - SII captures the combined effects of immune dysregulation and inflammation, which are central to the progression of liver disease and mortality. 2. **Integration in Prognostic Models:** - The study developed two nomograms to predict 18-month mortality: - **Nomogram 1:** Child-Pugh score + SII - **Nomogram 2:** Age + Child-Pugh score + SII - Nomogram 2 demonstrated superior predictive performance, with a C-index of **0.82** and high area under the curve (AUC) values for 6-, 12-, and 18-month mortality prediction. 3. **Enhanced Predictive Accuracy:** - Adding SII to traditional prognostic scores like Child-Pugh significantly improved the model's ability to stratify patients into high- and low-risk groups. Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI) and Integrated Discrimination Improvement (IDI) analyses confirmed that SII enhances prognostic accuracy over the Child-Pugh score alone. 4. **Temporal Dynamics:** - SII is more effective in predicting early mortality (≤12 months), while nutritional markers like PNI become stronger predictors beyond one year. This indicates shifting pathophysiological dynamics in cirrhotic patients undergoing TIPS. 5. **Clinical Utility:** - Decision curve analysis showed that Nomogram 2 (incorporating SII) provides strong net clinical benefit across multiple risk thresholds. This makes SII a valuable tool for individualized mortality risk estimation and early identification of high-risk patients post-TIPS. --- **Conclusion:** SII is a robust systemic inflammatory marker that plays a critical role in predicting both short-term and long-term mortality in cirrhotic patients undergoing TIPS. Its integration into predictive models, alongside age and the Child-Pugh score, enhances risk stratification and supports clinical decision-making. By reflecting the interplay between inflammation and liver dysfunction, SII provides valuable insights into the mechanisms driving mortality and helps identify high-risk patients for early intervention.

Efficacy of TDF, TAF, TMF, and TDF-to-TAF switch in chronic hepatitis B:

The efficacy of TDF, TAF, TMF, and the TDF-to-TAF switch in treating chronic hepatitis B (CHB) has been extensively studied to identify the most effective regimen for individualized care. Here is a detailed breakdown of their efficacy based on the study context: ### 1. **TDF (Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate):** - **Virological Response:** TDF is highly effective in suppressing HBV replication. It achieves similar viral suppression rates as TAF and TMF. - **HBsAg Clearance:** HBsAg clearance is rare (<5%) across all regimens, including TDF, indicating limited ability to achieve functional cure. - **HBeAg Loss:** TDF demonstrated lower rates of HBeAg loss compared to TAF, suggesting relatively weaker immune restoration. - **ALT Normalization:** TDF showed good efficacy in normalizing ALT levels but was outperformed by TMF and TAF. - **Safety Concerns:** Long-term use of TDF has been associated with renal and bone safety issues, including declines in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and bone mineral density (BMD). ### 2. **TAF (Tenofovir Alafenamide):** - **Virological Response:** TAF achieves similar viral suppression rates as TDF and TMF. - **HBsAg Clearance:** TAF showed no significant advantage in HBsAg clearance compared to other regimens (<5% clearance rate). - **HBeAg Loss:** TAF demonstrated the highest HBeAg clearance rates among the four regimens, indicating stronger immune restoration potential. - **ALT Normalization:** TAF provided high rates of ALT normalization, comparable to TMF. - **Safety Profile:** TAF significantly improves renal and bone safety compared to TDF. It causes minimal declines in eGFR and less BMD loss during long-term follow-up, making it a safer alternative for patients with pre-existing comorbidities. ### 3. **TMF (Tenofovir MonoFumarate):** - **Virological Response:** TMF achieves comparable viral suppression rates to TDF and TAF, indicating strong antiviral efficacy. - **HBsAg Clearance:** Similar to other regimens, TMF showed rare HBsAg clearance (<5%). - **HBeAg Loss:** TMF demonstrated comparable HBeAg loss rates to TAF, indicating good immune restoration potential. - **ALT Normalization:** TMF showed the highest ALT normalization rates among the four regimens, suggesting better hepatic enzyme recovery potential. - **Safety Profile:** TMF exhibited promising biochemical improvements, but long-term data on renal and bone safety are limited. Most TMF trials were short-term (≤48 weeks) and predominantly conducted in Asian populations. ### 4. **TDF-to-TAF Switch:** - **Virological Response:** Patients switching from TDF to TAF initially showed slightly higher virological response rates compared to TDF alone. However, this advantage diminished after adjusting for confounders. - **HBsAg Clearance:** No significant improvement in HBsAg clearance was observed after switching to TAF. - **HBeAg Loss:** Switching to TAF did not significantly enhance HBeAg loss rates compared to TAF monotherapy. - **ALT Normalization:** The switch provided comparable ALT normalization rates to TAF monotherapy. - **Safety Benefits:** Patients switching from TDF to TAF experienced notable improvements in renal and bone safety markers, including better eGFR and reduced bone mineral density loss, without compromising antiviral efficacy. This supports transitioning to TAF in patients with existing renal or bone comorbidities. ### **Efficacy Rankings (SUCRA Probabilities):** Based on surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities: - **Virological Response:** TDF-to-TAF switch ranked highest. - **HBeAg Loss:** TAF and TMF ranked highest. - **ALT Normalization:** TMF ranked highest. - **HBsAg Clearance:** TAF ranked highest, though clearance rates remained rare across all regimens. ### **Clinical Implications:** - **TAF:** Emerged as the most balanced regimen, combining strong antiviral activity with superior renal and bone safety. It is ideal for patients with pre-existing bone or renal issues. - **TMF:** Shows promise for hepatic enzyme normalization and may serve as an alternative for patients with high ALT but preserved renal function. However, its long-term safety profile requires further study. - **TDF:** Remains a cost-effective option for low-risk individuals without renal or bone concerns. - **TDF-to-TAF Switch:** Recommended for patients experiencing renal or bone complications during long-term TDF therapy, as it improves safety without compromising efficacy. ### **Limitations:** - TMF data are primarily short-term, with limited long-term follow-up on resistance or cumulative toxicity beyond 144 weeks. - Most studies lacked detailed long-term data on outcomes like resistance or cumulative toxicity. ### **Conclusions:** - All four regimens effectively suppress HBV replication. - TAF stands out as the most comprehensive option, combining efficacy and safety. - TMF shows promise for hepatic normalization, warranting further multicenter and long-duration studies to confirm its role in CHB therapy. - Switching from TDF to TAF is beneficial for patients with renal or bone comorbidities. This detailed evaluation highlights the strengths and limitations of each regimen, enabling clinicians to tailor CHB therapy based on individual patient needs and risk profiles.

Gut mycobiome

The gut mycobiome refers to the fungal community residing within the human gastrointestinal system. While the gut microbiome (bacteria) has been extensively studied, the mycobiome remains underexplored, despite its significant role in health and disease. Fungi in the gut are far less abundant than bacteria but have crucial metabolic and immune functions, influencing various physiological processes and disease states. Recent research has highlighted the gut mycobiome's contribution to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). In a study comparing 90 NAFLD patients with 90 healthy controls, researchers found that the gut mycobiome significantly influences serum metabolites, which are critical for liver health. Although overall fungal diversity and community structure did not differ between the groups, four fungal species were enriched in NAFLD patients: *Aspergillus sp. c25*, *Pseudopithomyces sp. c174*, *Mucor sp. c176*, and *Ascochyta c213*. These fungi correlated with specific metabolites, some protective (e.g., glycoursodeoxycholic acid) and others harmful (e.g., phenylacetic acid, linked to lipid accumulation in the liver). The study also revealed complex fungal-bacterial interaction networks, with distinct microbial connectivity patterns in NAFLD. Certain fungi, such as *Alternaria alternata* and *Penicillium sp.*, emerged as key hubs in NAFLD, while others like *Schizophyllum sp.* were prominent in healthy controls, suggesting their protective roles. Importantly, predictive modeling using fungal and bacterial species achieved strong accuracy in differentiating NAFLD patients from healthy individuals, demonstrating the diagnostic potential of the gut mycobiome. Mechanistically, the enriched fungi may contribute to NAFLD progression through metabolite production (e.g., ethanol, mycotoxins) or immune modulation affecting hepatic inflammation and lipid metabolism. These findings emphasize the gut mycobiome's functional importance in liver health and its potential as a therapeutic target for NAFLD.

The prognostic value of the direct bilirubin to albumin ratio

The direct bilirubin-to-albumin ratio (DBAR) has emerged as a reliable prognostic marker for assessing 28-day mortality in critically ill patients with cirrhosis, as demonstrated by a study utilizing the MIMIC-IV database. Cirrhosis patients in ICUs face high mortality rates, and traditional models like MELD and Child-Pugh have limitations due to complexity and subjective parameters. DBAR, which combines two key liver function markers—direct bilirubin (reflecting hepatocyte injury) and albumin (indicating liver synthetic ability)—offers a simpler, objective, and accessible alternative. The study analyzed data from 509 adult cirrhotic patients and found that elevated DBAR values were strongly associated with worse outcomes. Patients with DBAR ≥ 4 were classified as high-risk and demonstrated significantly lower survival rates (56.9% vs. 18.4% mortality within 28 days). Multivariate Cox regression analysis confirmed DBAR as an independent predictor of mortality (HR 1.16), alongside age, lactate, INR, and vasoactive medication use. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and nonlinear restricted cubic spline analysis further validated DBAR’s prognostic accuracy. DBAR showed good predictive performance (AUC 0.702), comparable to the MELD score (AUC 0.744) and superior to albumin alone (AUC 0.549). Machine learning ranked DBAR among the top predictors of cirrhosis prognosis, alongside lactate and BUN. External validation using the eICU-CRD database confirmed its reproducibility (AUC ≈ 0.71). DBAR’s predictive effect was consistent across subgroups, though variations were noted in patients with ascites and hepatorenal syndrome. Clinically, elevated DBAR signals severe hepatic dysfunction, inflammation, and malnutrition, making it a practical and cost-effective biomarker for bedside mortality risk assessment in ICU settings.

Immune Dysfunction and Infection Risk in Advanced Liver Disease

Immune dysfunction and infection risk are critical and interlinked concerns in patients with advanced liver disease, including cirrhosis and acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF). The immune system undergoes profound changes in these conditions, leading to increased susceptibility to infections, which can further exacerbate liver dysfunction and significantly raise the risk of morbidity and mortality. Below is a detailed explanation of the key factors contributing to immune dysfunction and infection risk in advanced liver disease: --- ### 1. **Immune Paralysis in Advanced Liver Disease** - Severe hepatic impairment leads to immune "paralysis," a state where the immune system's ability to respond to pathogens is significantly weakened. - Immune cells, such as neutrophils, monocytes, macrophages, T-cells, and B-cells, lose their functional capacity, leading to increased vulnerability to infections. --- ### 2. **Liver’s Immunologic Role** - The liver is a central immune organ with a unique role in maintaining immune homeostasis. It contains various resident immune cells, such as Kupffer cells (liver macrophages), natural killer (NK) cells, and mucosal-associated invariant T (MAIT) cells. - These immune cells regulate inflammation, promote immune tolerance, and detoxify gut-derived molecules. In liver disease, the liver's immunologic functions are impaired, contributing to systemic immune dysfunction. --- ### 3. **Cirrhosis-Associated Immune Dysfunction (CAID)** - CAID describes a spectrum of immune alterations occurring in cirrhosis, ranging from low-grade to high-grade systemic inflammation. - Early stages of cirrhosis are characterized by heightened systemic inflammation, while advanced stages exhibit immunosuppression, leaving patients vulnerable to infections. --- ### 4. **Gut-Liver Axis Disruption** - **Intestinal Barrier Breakdown**: In cirrhosis, the intestinal barrier becomes compromised, allowing bacterial products (e.g., lipopolysaccharides or LPS) to translocate into the portal circulation. - **Systemic Inflammation**: The translocation of bacterial products triggers systemic inflammation, further impairing immune function. - **Portal Hypertension**: Increased portal pressure damages the gut-vascular barrier, exacerbating microbial leakage into the bloodstream and perpetuating inflammation. --- ### 5. **Key Immune Cell Dysfunctions** - **Neutrophil Dysfunction**: - Neutrophils exhibit impaired migration, phagocytosis, and oxidative burst, reducing their ability to kill pathogens effectively. - This dysfunction is particularly evident in cirrhosis and alcoholic hepatitis. - **Monocyte and Macrophage Impairment**: - Monocytes and Kupffer cells show reduced proinflammatory signaling, impaired antigen presentation, and increased production of anti-inflammatory cytokines like IL-10. - This contributes to immune tolerance and a weakened response to infections. - **MAIT Cell Depletion**: - MAIT cells, which are critical for gut integrity and antibacterial defense, are significantly reduced in cirrhosis. - Their depletion weakens the gut's ability to combat bacterial translocation and maintain immune balance. - **Adaptive Immunity Loss**: - Cirrhosis is associated with T-cell and B-cell dysfunction, including lymphopenia, impaired T-helper cell maturation, and an increase in suppressive CD8+HLA-DR+ T-cell subsets. - These changes impair the adaptive immune system's ability to mount effective responses to infections. --- ### 6. **DAMP and PAMP Activation** - Injured hepatocytes release damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) and pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). - These molecules overstimulate immune receptors, leading to immune exhaustion and a reduced ability to fight infections. --- ### 7. **Infections as a Driver of Decompensation** - Bacterial infections often precede or trigger acute decompensation in cirrhosis. - Common complications include spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), hepatic encephalopathy, renal failure, and sepsis. - Infections significantly worsen the prognosis, increasing short-term mortality rates. --- ### 8. **Alcohol’s Impact on Immunity** - Chronic alcohol use, particularly in alcohol-associated liver disease (ALD), disrupts the gut microbiota and weakens the intestinal barrier. - This increases the risk and severity of infections, further exacerbating liver dysfunction. --- ### 9. **Multidrug-Resistant Organisms (MDROs)** - Frequent use of antibiotics and prolonged hospitalizations in liver disease patients increase the risk of colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms. - MDRO infections are challenging to treat and are associated with poor outcomes due to reduced treatment efficacy. --- ### 10. **Diagnostic Challenges** - Immune paralysis in advanced liver disease blunts typical infection symptoms such as fever and leukocytosis, making infections harder to detect. - This necessitates the use of molecular diagnostic tools, such as multiplex PCR and metagenomic sequencing, to identify pathogens and resistance genes in culture-negative infections. --- ### 11. **Emerging Therapeutic Strategies** - **Targeting Immune Pathways**: - Therapies targeting immune checkpoints like MerTK, PD-1/PD-L1, or TLR pathways are being explored to restore immune function. - **Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF)**: - G-CSF can enhance neutrophil function and improve infection outcomes in cirrhosis. - **IL-22 Administration**: - IL-22 has regenerative and antibacterial properties that may strengthen gut integrity and immune defenses. - **Vaccination**: - Vaccines against influenza, pneumococcus, hepatitis A, and hepatitis B are recommended, though vaccine efficacy declines with worsening liver function. --- ### 12. **Future Outlook** - A comprehensive understanding of immune signaling in liver disease could pave the way for novel therapies that reverse immune dysfunction, reduce infection-related mortality, and improve long-term outcomes in patients with cirrhosis and ACLF. - Personalized approaches addressing the unique immune profiles of patients with advanced liver disease are likely to play a pivotal role in improving management and prognosis. --- ### Summary Patients with advanced liver disease face significant immune dysfunction, making them highly susceptible to infections. Factors such as immune paralysis, gut-liver axis disruption, neutrophil and macrophage dysfunction, and adaptive immunity loss contribute to this vulnerability. Infections not only worsen liver function but also drive acute decompensation and increase mortality. Diagnostic challenges and the rise of multidrug-resistant organisms further complicate management. However, emerging therapies and preventive strategies, including vaccination and immune-modulating treatments, offer hope for improving outcomes in these patients.

PPAR Vs UDCA in PBC

Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) is a chronic autoimmune liver disease characterized by progressive destruction of bile ducts, leading to cholestasis and liver damage. Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the first-line treatment for PBC. However, a significant proportion of patients (approximately 30-40%) exhibit an inadequate biochemical response or intolerance to UDCA. For these patients, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) agonists have emerged as promising second-line therapeutic options. ### Key Comparison: PPAR Agonists vs. UDCA in PBC #### 1. **Effectiveness (Biochemical Response)** - **PPAR Agonists:** - The systematic review and network meta-analysis revealed that PPAR agonists (bezafibrate, fenofibrate, elafibranor, and seladelpar) significantly outperformed placebo and UDCA (with or without placebo) in improving biochemical markers of liver function. - Bezafibrate ranked highest in terms of overall biochemical response, followed by seladelpar. Both agents demonstrated potent effects in reducing alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels, a key marker of cholestasis. - ALP normalization was most likely with bezafibrate and seladelpar, indicating robust improvement in cholestasis compared to UDCA. - **UDCA:** - UDCA is effective in many patients with PBC, particularly when administered early in the disease. However, for those with inadequate biochemical response, UDCA alone is insufficient to prevent disease progression or improve long-term outcomes. #### 2. **Safety and Tolerability** - **PPAR Agonists:** - PPAR agonists were generally well-tolerated, with rare adverse event-related discontinuations observed across the studies. - No significant safety concerns were identified, and reductions in ALP and bilirubin levels were consistent regardless of baseline disease severity. - Bezafibrate and seladelpar demonstrated favorable safety profiles, making them attractive options for long-term use. - **UDCA:** - UDCA is also well-tolerated in most patients, but some may experience gastrointestinal side effects or intolerance, necessitating alternative therapies. #### 3. **Mechanism of Action** - **PPAR Agonists:** - PPAR agonists target nuclear receptors (PPAR-α, PPAR-δ, and PPAR-γ) that regulate lipid metabolism, inflammation, and bile acid homeostasis. This dual action helps reduce cholestasis and liver inflammation, addressing key pathological processes in PBC. - Bezafibrate and fenofibrate are primarily PPAR-α agonists, while seladelpar is a selective PPAR-δ agonist, and elafibranor is a dual PPAR-α/δ agonist. - **UDCA:** - UDCA works by reducing bile acid toxicity, improving bile flow, and exerting anti-inflammatory effects. However, its mechanism does not directly address the metabolic and inflammatory pathways targeted by PPAR agonists. #### 4. **Clinical Implications** - **PPAR Agonists as Second-Line Therapy:** - For patients with inadequate or intolerant response to UDCA, PPAR agonists provide an effective second-line option, with bezafibrate and seladelpar emerging as leading choices based on biochemical outcomes. - These agents offer a complementary mechanism of action to UDCA, making combination therapy a potential strategy for optimizing treatment in PBC. - **UDCA as First-Line Therapy:** - UDCA remains the standard initial therapy for PBC due to its proven efficacy in many patients and its long history of use. However, its limitations in non-responders highlight the need for additional therapeutic options like PPAR agonists. #### 5. **Research and Future Directions** - The findings of the systematic review emphasize the need for head-to-head clinical trials comparing PPAR agonists directly to UDCA and to each other. This would provide more definitive evidence on their relative efficacy, safety, and long-term benefits. - Investigating the impact of PPAR agonists on patient-centered outcomes (e.g., quality of life, symptom relief, and long-term disease progression) is also a critical area for future research. ### Conclusion PPAR agonists represent a significant advancement in the management of PBC, particularly for patients who do not adequately respond to UDCA. Bezafibrate and seladelpar stand out as the most effective options based on biochemical outcomes, with good safety and tolerability profiles. While UDCA remains the cornerstone of first-line therapy, PPAR agonists offer a valuable second-line strategy to improve outcomes in this challenging patient population.

Bezafibrate, PBC and Transplant-free survival

Bezafibrate has emerged as a significant therapeutic agent for improving transplant-free survival in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) when used in combination with ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). PBC is a chronic autoimmune liver disease that can progress to cirrhosis and liver failure, necessitating liver transplantation. While UDCA remains the first-line treatment, a subset of patients exhibits incomplete biochemical responses, requiring additional therapeutic interventions. Recent real-world evidence from a large Japanese cohort study, encompassing 3,908 patients and over 21,000 patient-years, demonstrated that the combination of bezafibrate (BZF) and UDCA substantially improved long-term outcomes. Patients receiving UDCA + BZF experienced a marked reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality and liver-related death or transplantation, with adjusted hazard ratios of 0.33 and 0.27, respectively, both highly significant (p < 0.001). This survival benefit was consistent across various baseline risk groups, underscoring the robustness of the findings. The clinical benefit of the combination therapy was quantified through the number needed to treat (NNT). To prevent one additional death or liver transplantation, the NNT was 29 at 5 years, 14 at 10 years, and 8 at 15 years, highlighting its substantial long-term efficacy. Importantly, bezafibrate not only improves biochemical markers and symptoms, as shown in prior trials, but also enhances survival outcomes, reinforcing its role as a second-line treatment for PBC. These findings strongly support the routine use of bezafibrate alongside UDCA in patients with incomplete response, offering a promising strategy to improve transplant-free survival and overall disease management in PBC.

Fibrates for Itch (FITCH) in Fibrosing Cholangiopathies

The FITCH trial investigated the efficacy of bezafibrate, a broad peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) agonist, in alleviating moderate to severe pruritus in patients with fibrosing cholangiopathies, including primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), and secondary sclerosing cholangitis (SSC). Conducted between 2016 and 2019 as a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, it enrolled 74 adults with pruritus ≥5/10 on a visual analog scale (VAS). Patients received either bezafibrate 400 mg daily or placebo for 21 days. The primary endpoint, a ≥50% reduction in itch intensity, was achieved by 45% of bezafibrate-treated patients compared to 11% in the placebo group (P=0.003). Secondary measures, including daily VAS scores and pruritus questionnaires (5D-Itch, Liver Disease Symptom Index 2.0), confirmed significant improvements in itch severity, sleep quality, and daily functioning. Bezafibrate also reduced serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) by 35% versus a 6% increase in the placebo group (P=0.03), correlating strongly with pruritus relief. Gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and ALT levels improved, while bile acids and autotaxin levels remained unchanged, suggesting the antipruritic effect was independent of these pathways. Bezafibrate was effective across PSC, PBC, and varying pruritus severities, with comparable benefits in cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients. It was well-tolerated, with mild side effects such as transient mouth pain and back pain. The study concluded that bezafibrate offers a promising short-term treatment for cholestatic pruritus, with its antipruritic and anticholestatic effects likely mediated through PPAR activation. Long-term studies are needed to confirm its sustained efficacy and safety.

RESPONSE Trial and PBC

The RESPONSE trial was a pivotal phase 3 study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of seladelpar, a selective peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor delta (PPARδ) agonist, in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) who had an inadequate response to or could not tolerate ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). Conducted across 24 countries, the trial enrolled 193 patients who were randomized 2:1 to receive seladelpar (10 mg daily) or placebo, with or without UDCA background therapy, over 12 months. The primary endpoint was achieving a biochemical response, defined as alkaline phosphatase (ALP) <1.67× upper limit of normal (ULN), ≥15% reduction from baseline, and normal total bilirubin at month 12. Seladelpar demonstrated superior efficacy, achieving a biochemical response in 61.7% of patients versus 20.0% in the placebo group (P<0.001). Additionally, 25% of seladelpar-treated patients achieved full ALP normalization compared to 0% with placebo (P<0.001), indicating significant disease control. Seladelpar also reduced mean ALP levels by 42.4%, compared to only 4.3% with placebo, reflecting strong anticholestatic activity. Secondary endpoints included improvements in pruritus and quality of life. Among patients with moderate-to-severe itching, seladelpar reduced pruritus scores by −3.2 points versus −1.7 with placebo (P=0.005), providing clinically meaningful relief. Patients also reported improvements in fatigue, itch, and social functioning on quality-of-life measures. Seladelpar exhibited a favorable safety profile, with adverse events mostly mild and similar between groups. Unlike obeticholic acid, seladelpar improved itch and had a cleaner safety profile, establishing it as a potentially superior second-line therapy for PBC.

ELATIVE and PBC

The ELATIVE trial was a clinical study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of **elafibranor**, a dual PPAR-α/δ agonist, as a potential second-line treatment for **primary biliary cholangitis (PBC)**. PBC is a chronic autoimmune liver disease characterized by progressive destruction of bile ducts, leading to cholestasis, fibrosis, and eventually cirrhosis. The trial specifically targeted patients with PBC who had an inadequate response or intolerance to **ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)**, the current first-line therapy for the disease. ### Key Aspects of the ELATIVE Trial: #### **Objective:** The primary goal of the ELATIVE trial was to determine whether elafibranor could improve **biochemical markers of cholestasis** and serve as a safe and effective second-line therapy for PBC patients who could not achieve sufficient benefits from UDCA. #### **Study Design:** - **Type:** Multicenter, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. - **Duration:** 52 weeks, with continuation into a long-term open-label extension. - **Participants:** 161 patients randomized in a 2:1 ratio to receive either **elafibranor (80 mg once daily)** or placebo. - Conducted across **14 countries**. #### **Patient Demographics:** - **Gender:** Majority were women (96%), reflecting the typical gender distribution in PBC. - **Age:** Average age was 57 years. - **UDCA Use:** Approximately 94% of patients continued UDCA during the trial, mimicking real-world management of PBC. - **Disease Severity:** Around 39% of participants had **ALP levels >3× upper limit of normal (ULN)**, and 35% had fibrosis or cirrhosis at baseline. --- ### **Primary Endpoint:** The trial’s main endpoint was achieving a **biochemical response** at week 52, defined as: 1. **ALP <1.67× ULN**, 2. **≥15% reduction from baseline**, and 3. **Normal total bilirubin**. This endpoint is strongly predictive of **improved transplant-free survival** in PBC patients. --- ### **Results and Outcomes:** #### **Primary Outcome:** - **Biochemical Response:** - **Elafibranor group:** 51% achieved biochemical response at week 52. - **Placebo group:** Only 4% achieved biochemical response. - **Statistical Significance:** Difference of 47 percentage points (**P<0.001**), demonstrating robust efficacy. #### **ALP Normalization:** - 15% of elafibranor-treated patients achieved **normalization of ALP**, compared to none in the placebo group (**P=0.002**). - ALP reductions were evident as early as **4 weeks** and sustained throughout the trial. #### **Liver Enzymes and Bilirubin:** - **Elafibranor effects:** - Significant reductions in **γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT)**, **ALT**, and **IgM** levels. - **Stable bilirubin and albumin levels**, indicating improved liver function without hepatotoxicity. #### **Pruritus (Itch):** - **Moderate-to-severe itch:** No statistically significant differences in **WI-NRS scores** at weeks 24 or 52 compared to placebo. - However, patient-reported outcomes using **PBC-40** and **5-D itch scales** showed **modest improvements** favoring elafibranor. - Unlike **obeticholic acid**, which tends to worsen pruritus, elafibranor may reduce **itch-related burden**. #### **Lipid Metabolism:** - Elafibranor significantly lowered **triglycerides**, **VLDL cholesterol**, and **total cholesterol**, while maintaining stable **LDL** and **HDL cholesterol** levels. - This contrasts favorably with **obeticholic acid**, which often raises **LDL levels**. #### **Fibrosis and Liver Stiffness:** - No significant changes in **enhanced liver fibrosis scores** or **liver stiffness** were observed after 52 weeks. - Longer follow-up is required to assess potential antifibrotic effects. --- ### **Safety Profile:** #### **Adverse Events:** - Overall, adverse events were similar between elafibranor and placebo groups. - Most common treatment-related side effects were mild **gastrointestinal events**: - **Abdominal pain**, **diarrhea**, **nausea**, and **vomiting** (each reported in ~10–12% of patients). #### **Muscle-Related Effects:** - **Creatine phosphokinase elevations** occurred more frequently in the elafibranor group (3.7%), occasionally leading to treatment discontinuation. - One serious case of **rhabdomyolysis** was reported in a patient with advanced cirrhosis and concomitant use of atorvastatin. #### **Hepatic and Renal Safety:** - **Drug-induced liver injury** was rare and reversible upon discontinuation. - Slight increases in **creatinine** were noted in 10% of patients, but without changes in **cystatin C** or **estimated glomerular filtration rate**, suggesting no significant renal impairment. #### **Mortality and Serious Events:** - Two deaths occurred in the elafibranor group: - One postoperative death. - One due to **biliary sepsis**. - Neither death was considered treatment-related. - Serious adverse events were similar between elafibranor and placebo groups (10% vs. 13%). --- ### **Comparison to Other Agents:** - Unlike **obeticholic acid**: - Elafibranor improved **lipid parameters**. - Did not worsen **pruritus**, suggesting a more favorable tolerability and metabolic profile for long-term management of PBC. --- ### **Mechanism of Action:** Elafibranor works by activating **PPAR-α** and **PPAR-δ**, which are nuclear receptors involved in: 1. **Bile acid metabolism**: Reducing toxic bile acid accumulation. 2. **Inflammation**: Mitigating liver inflammation associated with PBC. 3. **Lipid oxidation**: Improving lipid profiles. This mechanism helps reduce **hepatic injury** and improve **cholestatic liver function**. --- ### **Clinical Significance:** - Rapid and sustained biochemical improvements were observed within the first month of treatment and persisted through 52 weeks. - **Normalization of ALP and bilirubin levels** correlates with **improved long-term outcomes** in PBC. - The ELATIVE trial results position elafibranor as a promising **second-line therapy** for patients who fail or cannot tolerate UDCA. --- ### **Future Outlook:** - Long-term studies and open-label extensions are ongoing to further evaluate: - Effects on **clinical outcomes**. - **Fibrosis regression**. - Overall **survival** in PBC patients. Elafibranor represents a significant advancement in the treatment landscape for PBC, offering a safe and effective alternative for patients with unmet therapeutic needs.

POISE Study

The POISE study is a phase 3 clinical trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of obeticholic acid (OCA), a farnesoid X receptor (FXR) agonist, in patients with primary biliary cholangitis (PBC) who had an inadequate response or intolerance to ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). Below is a detailed breakdown of the study: ### **Purpose** The study aimed to address the unmet need in PBC patients who do not respond adequately to UDCA, the first-line treatment for PBC. OCA was investigated as a second-line therapy to improve biochemical markers associated with disease progression, particularly alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and bilirubin levels, which are strongly linked to improved transplant-free survival in PBC. --- ### **Study Design** - **Type:** 12-month, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. - **Participants:** 217 patients with PBC. - **Treatment Groups:** - OCA 10 mg daily. - OCA 5 mg daily titrated to 10 mg. - Placebo. - Patients were allowed to continue UDCA therapy during the trial, with 93% of participants doing so. --- ### **Patient Profile** - **Demographics:** Predominantly middle-aged women (91% female, mean age 56 years). - **Ethnicity:** Mostly White (94%). - **Disease Characteristics:** Long-standing PBC with elevated ALP levels (≥1.67× the upper limit of normal [ULN]). --- ### **Primary Endpoint** The main composite endpoint was achieving: 1. ALP <1.67× ULN. 2. A ≥15% reduction in ALP from baseline. 3. Normal total bilirubin levels at 12 months. These parameters are strongly associated with improved transplant-free survival in PBC patients. --- ### **Key Results** #### **Achievement of Primary Endpoint** - **OCA 5 mg titrated to 10 mg:** 46% of patients achieved the primary endpoint. - **OCA 10 mg:** 47% of patients achieved the primary endpoint. - **Placebo:** Only 10% of patients achieved the endpoint. - Statistical significance: P<0.001 for both OCA groups compared to placebo. #### **ALP and Bilirubin Reduction** - **ALP Reduction:** Substantial decreases in ALP were observed in the OCA groups (−113 to −130 U/L) compared to placebo (−14 U/L). - **Total Bilirubin:** Levels decreased in the OCA groups but slightly increased in the placebo group, indicating improved cholestasis control. #### **Rapid and Sustained Response** - Biochemical improvements were seen as early as two weeks after starting OCA and were maintained throughout the study. - Sustained effects were observed in the open-label extension study over two years. #### **Other Liver Enzyme Effects** OCA significantly reduced gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and conjugated bilirubin levels, reinforcing its role in improving markers of hepatocellular and cholestatic injury. #### **Inflammatory and Immune Modulation** Exploratory analyses showed decreased levels of inflammatory and immune markers (e.g., C-reactive protein, TNF-α, IgM, IgG, and IL-12) in OCA-treated patients, suggesting systemic anti-inflammatory and immune-regulating effects through FXR activation. #### **Mechanistic Biomarker Support** OCA increased circulating fibroblast growth factor-19 (FGF-19) and reduced total bile acids, consistent with FXR activation. This mechanism suppresses bile acid synthesis and reduces hepatocellular bile acid load. --- ### **Safety and Adverse Events** #### **Pruritus** - Pruritus (itching) was the most common side effect: - **OCA 5 mg titrated to 10 mg:** 56% of patients. - **OCA 10 mg:** 68% of patients. - **Placebo:** 38% of patients. - Pruritus was dose-dependent and occasionally required dose reduction or treatment discontinuation. #### **Other Adverse Events** - Serious adverse events occurred in: - **OCA 5 mg titrated to 10 mg:** 16%. - **OCA 10 mg:** 11%. - **Placebo:** 4%. - Most adverse events were mild-to-moderate and resolved without long-term effects. - One death occurred during the study but was unrelated to OCA treatment. #### **Lipid Profile Effects** - **HDL Cholesterol:** Dose-related decreases. - **LDL Cholesterol:** Transient increases. - **Triglycerides:** Reductions. These changes are attributed to FXR-mediated regulation of bile acid and cholesterol metabolism. #### **Bone Mineral Density** DEXA scans showed smaller declines in femoral bone mineral density in OCA-treated patients compared to placebo, suggesting potential protective effects on skeletal health. --- ### **Limitations** 1. **Duration:** The 12-month trial was insufficient to assess long-term clinical outcomes, including fibrosis improvement. 2. **Pruritus:** It remains a significant tolerability issue, requiring optimized dose titration strategies. 3. **Multiplicity Corrections:** Limited to primary endpoints. --- ### **Open-Label Extension Outcomes** In the 5-year extension study: - Patients continuing OCA maintained biochemical improvements. - Patients switching from placebo experienced similar benefits. This confirmed the reproducibility and durability of OCA’s efficacy. --- ### **Clinical Significance** Although fibrosis improvement was not demonstrated within the trial duration, the observed biochemical responses strongly predict reduced risk of liver failure, transplantation, and death based on established prognostic models. --- ### **Conclusion** The POISE study established that obeticholic acid significantly improves key biochemical markers of disease progression in PBC patients unresponsive to UDCA. Despite challenges with pruritus, OCA demonstrated robust efficacy and established FXR agonism as a viable disease-modifying mechanism for PBC. Long-term outcome trials, such as COBALT, were initiated to confirm survival benefits and refine dosing strategies for broader clinical use.

COBALT Trial and PBC

The **COBALT Trial** was a significant clinical study aimed at evaluating the long-term clinical benefits of **obeticholic acid (OCA)** in the treatment of **primary biliary cholangitis (PBC)**, a chronic autoimmune liver disease. Below is a detailed overview of the COBALT trial and its implications for PBC management: --- ### **What is PBC?** - **Primary biliary cholangitis (PBC)** is a chronic autoimmune liver disease characterized by the gradual destruction of bile ducts in the liver. This leads to bile accumulation, inflammation, and progressive liver damage, potentially resulting in cirrhosis, liver failure, or the need for a liver transplant. - PBC disproportionately affects **middle-aged women** and has no known cure. The primary treatment options aim to slow disease progression and manage symptoms. --- ### **What is Obeticholic Acid (OCA)?** - OCA is a synthetic bile acid analog that activates the **farnesoid X receptor (FXR)**, a key regulator of bile acid production and inflammation in the liver. - It was **conditionally approved for PBC** under the accelerated approval pathway because it demonstrated biochemical improvements in **alkaline phosphatase (ALP)** levels, a surrogate marker of disease activity. However, confirmatory evidence of long-term clinical benefits was required. --- ### **Purpose of the COBALT Trial** The COBALT trial was designed to: 1. Assess whether OCA provides **long-term clinical benefits** for PBC patients. 2. Confirm its ability to improve survival and reduce severe liver-related outcomes, such as liver transplantation, liver failure, or death. --- ### **COBALT Trial Design** 1. **Type of Study**: - A **global, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial**. - Included a **prespecified external control (EC) analysis** using real-world data to supplement the randomized trial. 2. **Participants**: - 334 PBC patients from **27 countries** were enrolled. - The majority were **middle-aged women** (mean age: 53 years). - About **88% of participants** were already taking **ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)**, the standard first-line therapy for PBC. - Patients with decompensated cirrhosis or other major liver conditions were excluded. 3. **Treatment Groups**: - Patients were randomized to receive either **OCA (5–10 mg daily)** or a **placebo**. - A **real-world external control group** was created using data from the Komodo Healthcare Map database, which included 1,051 matched PBC patients. 4. **Primary Endpoint**: - The composite endpoint included time to death, liver transplantation, **MELD score ≥15**, uncontrolled ascites, or hospitalization due to hepatic decompensation events (e.g., variceal bleeding or encephalopathy). --- ### **Challenges Faced by the COBALT Trial** 1. **Recruitment and Retention Difficulties**: - Once OCA became commercially available, it became challenging to recruit and retain patients in a long-term placebo-controlled study. - Many patients in the placebo group switched to commercially available OCA, compromising trial blinding and integrity. 2. **Functional Unblinding**: - Since **ALP levels** were routinely monitored, physicians and patients could infer treatment assignments. This led to **bias** and an increased likelihood of patients in the placebo group discontinuing or switching to open-label OCA. 3. **Trial Termination**: - The trial was terminated early in 2021 due to **futility** and the practical challenges of maintaining a blinded, placebo-controlled design. --- ### **Key Results of the COBALT Trial** 1. **Randomized Arm Results**: - In the **intention-to-treat analysis**, endpoint events occurred in **28.6% of OCA patients** and **28.9% of placebo patients** (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.01). - This initially suggested no significant difference between OCA and placebo. 2. **Adjustments for Crossover and Censoring**: - Adjustments using **inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW)** were applied to account for crossover and informative censoring. - After these corrections, the hazard ratio shifted to **0.77**, suggesting a favorable benefit for OCA. 3. **External Control (EC) Analysis**: - The EC analysis compared OCA-treated patients with 1,051 matched real-world patients. - Results showed a **60% reduction in the risk of adverse clinical outcomes** (HR = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.22–0.69; P = 0.001), including death, liver transplantation, or hepatic decompensation. 4. **Safety and Tolerability**: - OCA was generally well tolerated. - The most common side effect was **pruritus (itching)**, reported in **78.6% of OCA patients** compared to **51.2% of placebo patients**. - Other side effects included mild **edema**, **abdominal pain**, **nausea**, and **headache**. - Serious adverse events occurred at similar rates in both groups (~32%). 5. **Hepatic Safety Profile**: - Hepatic adverse events (e.g., elevated bilirubin, ascites, varices) were less frequent in the OCA group compared to the placebo group, alleviating earlier concerns about potential hepatotoxicity. --- ### **Implications of the COBALT Trial** 1. **Efficacy of OCA**: - The trial demonstrated that OCA reduces the risk of serious liver-related events, supporting its long-term benefit in managing PBC. - While the randomized portion of the trial did not show a clear difference due to biases, the adjusted and external control analyses consistently indicated significant benefits. 2. **Real-World Evidence (RWE)**: - The use of real-world data in the EC analysis was pivotal in confirming OCA's efficacy. - This highlights the potential of **hybrid trial designs** that combine randomized and real-world evidence, especially for rare diseases like PBC. 3. **Regulatory and Ethical Considerations**: - The COBALT trial underscores the ethical challenges of maintaining placebo controls when effective commercial therapies exist. - Future confirmatory trials may increasingly rely on real-world evidence to validate accelerated approvals. 4. **Lessons on Data Bias**: - The trial revealed how **functional unblinding** and **differential dropout** can distort results in randomized trials. - Advanced statistical corrections and external controls can help mitigate these biases and provide more accurate estimates of treatment effects. --- ### **Conclusion** The COBALT trial reaffirmed the clinical value of OCA in PBC by demonstrating its ability to reduce the risk of serious liver events. Despite challenges with functional unblinding and trial termination, the use of real-world evidence and advanced statistical methods provided robust support for OCA's long-term benefits. The trial also highlighted the evolving role of hybrid trial designs in rare diseases, paving the way for more innovative approaches to confirmatory studies in the future.

Question Prompt List (QPL) for PBC

The **Question Prompt List (QPL)** for Primary Biliary Cholangitis (PBC) is a standardized tool designed to enhance physician-patient communication, improve patient engagement in care, and optimize health outcomes for individuals living with PBC. Below is a detailed explanation of the QPL, its development process, and its clinical significance: --- ### **Goal of the QPL** The primary goal of the QPL is to provide structured guidance to patients living with PBC on what questions to ask their physicians during consultations. This helps address unmet informational and therapeutic needs, empowering patients to actively participate in their care and make informed decisions. --- ### **Rationale** Patients with PBC often face challenges in knowing what information to seek during medical appointments. This lack of structured guidance can lead to gaps in understanding their condition, treatment options, and prognosis. The QPL was developed to bridge this gap by equipping patients with a carefully curated set of questions that promote shared decision-making and personalized care. --- ### **Development Process** The QPL was developed using a rigorous, evidence-based methodology through a Delphi study that involved international PBC experts and patient representatives. Below are the key steps in its creation: 1. **Participants**: - 108 respondents from 23 countries across 4 continents, including hepatologists, researchers, and patient advocates. - 56.5% of participants had over 10 years of experience with PBC. 2. **Survey Design**: - The initial survey included 43 potential questions covering nine aspects of PBC care: diagnosis, symptoms, treatment, monitoring, comorbidities, and support. - Questions were evaluated based on importance, with those rated as moderately/very important by >70% of participants classified as **Best Candidate Questions (BCQs)**. 3. **Refinement**: - Two rounds of in-person meetings were held to refine and finalize the wording and content of the QPL for clinical usability. 4. **Consensus**: - The final QPL was unanimously approved by 19 study team members during the consensus meeting. --- ### **Final Output** The finalized QPL contains **eight core patient questions** deemed most likely to improve care quality, physician-patient dialogue, and shared decision-making. These questions are: 1. **Symptom Management**: - *"What are the options to manage my itching and/or fatigue?"* - Focuses on addressing common but often underrecognized PBC symptoms. 2. **First-Line Therapy**: - *"Am I on the correct dosage of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA)?"* - Highlights the importance of proper dosing and adherence to first-line therapy. 3. **Second-Line Therapy**: - *"Do I need any therapy in addition to ursodeoxycholic acid?"* - Guides discussions on add-on treatments such as obeticholic acid or fibrates. 4. **Disease Severity**: - *"What is my risk for liver disease progression?"* - *"Do I have cirrhosis?"* - Prompts evaluation of fibrosis, prognosis, and disease staging. 5. **Monitoring**: - *"How often do I need a liver stiffness measurement over time?"* - Encourages regular assessment through transient elastography (VCTE) to monitor disease progression. 6. **Bone Health**: - *"Should my bone health be monitored and/or optimized?"* - Addresses the high risk of osteoporosis and fractures in PBC patients. 7. **Information Access**: - *"Where can I receive more information and support?"* - Ensures patients are connected with educational resources and peer-support networks. --- ### **Clinical Importance** The QPL is designed to empower patients and improve various aspects of care, including: - **Enhanced Dialogue**: - Facilitates open communication between patients and physicians, ensuring that critical issues are addressed during consultations. - **Symptom Control**: - Provides a structured way to discuss and manage debilitating symptoms like fatigue and itching. - **Personalized Treatment Planning**: - Helps tailor treatment regimens based on individual needs, such as adjusting UDCA dosage or considering second-line therapies. - **Monitoring and Risk Assessment**: - Promotes regular evaluations of liver stiffness and bone health, ensuring timely interventions and better long-term outcomes. - **Access to Support**: - Directs patients to reliable educational materials and peer-support groups for additional guidance and emotional support. --- ### **Limitations** While the QPL is an evidence-based tool, its wording may need adaptation to account for: - **Language Differences**: - Translation may be required for non-English-speaking populations. - **Cultural Variations**: - Questions may need to be tailored to align with cultural norms and expectations. - **Healthcare Settings**: - The applicability of questions may vary depending on the healthcare system in different countries. --- ### **Conclusion** The PBC QPL is a patient-centered tool that standardizes physician-patient communication, promotes shared decision-making, and addresses key aspects of care. By empowering patients to ask pertinent questions, the QPL improves care adherence, symptom management, and overall outcomes for individuals living with PBC. It represents a significant step forward in optimizing patient engagement in chronic disease management.

Risk Factors for Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a significant complication in patients with liver cirrhosis (LC), as it exacerbates portal hypertension and accelerates progression toward decompensation. Risk factors for PVT in cirrhotic patients can be categorized into four primary domains: **hemodynamic disturbance**, **cirrhosis severity**, **endothelial injury with hypercoagulability**, and **thrombophilic genetics**. Below is a detailed breakdown of these risk factors: --- ### **1. Hemodynamic Disturbance** - **Decreased Portal Vein Velocity (PVV):** - A PVV of less than 15 cm/s promotes blood stasis, which is a critical factor for thrombosis formation. - **Portal Vein Dilation:** - Dilation of the portal vein (> 14.5 mm) reduces flow velocity and leads to vortex formation, increasing the risk of thrombosis. - **Splenic Vein Dynamics:** - Splenic vein dilation and reduced velocity are strong predictors of PVT, especially post-splenectomy, as thrombosis often originates in the splenic vein. --- ### **2. Cirrhosis Severity** - **Portal Hypertension:** - Higher portal pressure (HVPG ≥ 16–20 mmHg) is strongly associated with PVT development. - **Complications of Cirrhosis:** - Ascites, variceal bleeding, and hepatic encephalopathy are markers of advanced cirrhosis and increase PVT risk. - **Liver Function Markers:** - Low serum albumin levels, Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) scores of B or C, and higher MELD scores independently predict PVT occurrence. --- ### **3. Endothelial Injury with Hypercoagulability** #### **Iatrogenic Causes:** - **Splenectomy:** - This surgical procedure increases PVT risk by ≥ 10-fold due to mechanical disruption of blood flow and endothelial injury. - **Endoscopic Variceal Treatments:** - Procedures for variceal bleeding can cause mechanical injury to the endothelium, elevating PVT risk. #### **Inflammation and Endotoxemia:** - **Bacterial Translocation:** - Migration of bacteria from the gut into systemic circulation triggers cytokine activation, damaging the endothelium. - **Inflammatory Markers:** - Elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) are predictive markers for inflammation-related PVT. #### **Emerging Biomarkers:** - **Phosphatidylserine-positive Microparticles (PS+MPs):** - These microparticles create a pro-thrombotic environment. - **Neutrophil Extracellular Traps (NETs):** - NETs contribute to a hypercoagulable state and endothelial injury. #### **Metabolic Factors:** - **Diabetes Mellitus:** - Diabetes promotes endothelial dysfunction and hypercoagulability. - **Hypertension and Obesity:** - Both conditions are additional risk factors for PVT. #### **Coagulation Imbalance:** - **Elevated D-Dimer:** - Levels > 0.87 µg/mL reflect increased clot formation and fibrinolysis. - **Mean Platelet Volume (MPV):** - Higher MPV indicates platelet activation and hypercoagulability. - **P-Selectin (CD62P):** - Elevated levels are markers of platelet activation and thrombus formation. #### **CAF Imbalance:** - **Factor VIII/Protein C Ratio:** - Disruption in this ratio indicates a loss of coagulation–anticoagulation balance. - **vWF/ADAMTS-13 Ratio:** - An imbalance here also reflects hypercoagulability. --- ### **4. Thrombophilic Genetic Mutations** - **Factor V Leiden Mutation:** - This mutation increases susceptibility to PVT, particularly in Caucasian populations. - **Prothrombin G20210A Mutation:** - Another genetic variant strongly associated with PVT risk in Caucasians. - **MTHFR C677T Mutation:** - This mutation is linked to hyperhomocysteinemia and thrombosis risk. - **JAK2 V617F Mutation:** - Associated with myeloproliferative disorders and increased thrombosis risk. - **Ethnic Differences:** - FV Leiden and G20210A mutations are more prevalent in Caucasians, while Protein C (PROC) variants are significant in Asian populations. --- ### **Risk Stratification** - **High-Risk Factors:** - Examples include splenectomy, low portal vein velocity (< 15 cm/s), and elevated D-dimer (> 0.87 µg/mL). - **Medium-Risk Factors:** - Conditions such as diabetes mellitus, Child–Turcotte–Pugh B/C classification, and moderate elevations in inflammatory markers. - **Clinical Guidance:** - High-risk patients require regular Doppler ultrasound screening and selective anticoagulation therapy. --- ### **Pathophysiology Insight** PVT development in cirrhotic patients is the result of complex interactions between hemodynamic disturbances, inflammatory processes, endothelial injury, and genetic predispositions. It is rarely caused by isolated factors but rather by the interplay of multiple risk domains. --- ### **Future Directions** - Validation of new biomarkers such as PS+MPs and NETs. - Establishment of definitive cutoff values for predictive markers. - Creation of integrated models to predict PVT risk more accurately. --- ### **Conclusion** Early identification of risk factors and proactive management strategies, including regular screening and targeted prevention, can significantly reduce complications and improve outcomes for cirrhotic patients at risk of portal vein thrombosis.

Prediction of the Risk of Developing Severe Liver Disease

The CORE model, developed by researchers at Karolinska Institutet, predicts the 10-year risk of developing severe liver diseases, such as cirrhosis and liver cancer, using a simple blood test. It combines three routinely measured liver enzyme levels (AST, ALT, GGT) with age and sex. The model demonstrated 88% predictive accuracy, outperforming the widely used FIB-4 method, and is particularly suited for primary care settings. Validated in cohorts from Finland and the UK, it is accessible via a web-based calculator (www.core-model.com). Further testing among high-risk groups is needed, and efforts are underway to integrate it into electronic medical record systems for streamlined clinical use.

Antibiotics prophylaxis in GI bleeding in Cirrhosis Liver

### Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Gastrointestinal (GI) Bleeding in Cirrhosis: A Comprehensive Overview Antibiotic prophylaxis has been a cornerstone in the management of cirrhotic patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding for decades. However, recent advancements in bleeding management and a better understanding of infection risks have prompted a reevaluation of this practice. Below is a detailed analysis of the topic based on contemporary evidence and expert opinion. --- ### **1. Historical Context** - **Rationale for Prophylaxis:** Antibiotic prophylaxis became standard in the management of variceal GI bleeding in cirrhotic patients because of the high prevalence of bacterial infections (up to 60%) in earlier decades. These infections were associated with increased risks of rebleeding and mortality. - **Impact of Infections:** Infections in cirrhotic patients significantly worsen outcomes by increasing portal hypertension, impairing clotting mechanisms, and triggering systemic inflammation. --- ### **2. Current Challenges** - **Improved Bleeding Management:** Advances in endoscopic techniques, vasoactive drugs, and supportive care have reduced the overall risk of complications like infections and rebleeding. This raises the question of whether prophylactic antibiotics still provide a significant mortality benefit in the modern era. - **Potential Overuse:** Routine use of antibiotics for up to 7 days, as recommended by international guidelines, may represent overtreatment for some patients, especially those at lower risk of infection. --- ### **3. Evidence from Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis** A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,322 patients assessed the efficacy and necessity of antibiotic prophylaxis in cirrhotic patients with upper GI bleeding. #### **Key Findings:** 1. **Mortality Outcomes:** - Shorter antibiotic courses (2–3 days) or no prophylaxis were **noninferior** to longer courses (5–7 days) in terms of all-cause mortality. - Probability of noninferiority: 97.3%. - Risk difference: 0.9% (95% Credible Interval [CrI], –2.6% to 4.9%). 2. **Rebleeding Risk:** - Shorter courses had a 73.8% probability of noninferiority for early rebleeding. - However, the credible interval (–4.2% to 10%) suggests some uncertainty. 3. **Infection Risk:** - Shorter or no prophylaxis was associated with a higher rate of bacterial infections (risk difference 15.2%). - Infection definitions varied significantly across trials, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions. 4. **Era of Trials:** - Studies conducted after 2004 showed stronger probabilities of noninferiority for both mortality and rebleeding, likely reflecting improvements in overall bleeding management. 5. **Adverse Events:** - None of the trials adequately reported adverse drug events, leaving gaps in understanding the safety profile of prophylactic antibiotics. --- ### **4. Implications for Guidelines** - **Current Recommendations:** International guidelines recommend up to 7 days of prophylactic antibiotics in cirrhotic patients with upper GI bleeding to prevent infections and improve outcomes. - **Reassessment Needed:** Evidence suggests that prolonged prophylaxis may not be necessary for all patients. Routine use could represent overtreatment, particularly in low-risk groups such as Child-Pugh A patients. - **Selective Use:** Experts advocate for a more tailored approach, identifying subgroups (e.g., Child-Pugh B/C patients) who may benefit most from antibiotics. --- ### **5. Risks of Antibiotic Prophylaxis** While generally considered safe, antibiotic prophylaxis is not without risks: - **Adverse Effects:** Gastrointestinal disturbances, allergic reactions, and other side effects. - **Clostridioides difficile Infection:** Increased risk of C. difficile colitis, particularly with broad-spectrum antibiotics. - **Antibiotic Resistance:** Prolonged use contributes to the development of multidrug-resistant organisms, a growing global health concern. --- ### **6. Analogies with Other Infections** In other infectious conditions, shorter antibiotic courses have been shown to be equally effective or even superior to longer courses. This trend supports the idea of questioning prolonged prophylactic antibiotic use in cirrhotic patients with GI bleeding. --- ### **7. Practice Inertia** Despite emerging evidence, the practice of routine prophylaxis persists due to: - Historical precedent set during an era of higher infection risks. - Lack of robust, high-quality data to definitively abandon the practice. --- ### **8. Future Research Directions** To address current gaps, future trials should: - Focus on defined cirrhotic populations (e.g., Child-Pugh A vs. B/C). - Compare shorter vs. no antibiotic prophylaxis. - Use standardized definitions for infection outcomes. - Report adverse events and antibiotic resistance rates. - Include clear endpoints like mortality, rebleeding, and infection rates. --- ### **9. Clinical Implications** - **Prolonged Prophylaxis:** May not be necessary for all cirrhotic patients with upper GI bleeding, particularly those at lower risk of infection. - **Selective and Shorter Use:** A reasonable interim strategy while awaiting more robust evidence. - **Guideline Evolution:** Recommendations are likely to evolve cautiously, balancing the risks of infection with those of antibiotic overuse. --- ### **10. Expert Commentary** Experts like Mezzacappa and Garcia-Tsao from Yale emphasize that while it may be time to revisit the widespread use of prophylactic antibiotics, the current evidence is insufficient to completely abandon the practice. A precision medicine approach—targeting antibiotics to those most likely to benefit—may be the optimal strategy moving forward. --- ### **Summary** Antibiotic prophylaxis remains a critical component of managing cirrhotic patients with upper GI bleeding, but its routine use for up to 7 days is increasingly being questioned. Emerging evidence suggests that shorter or selective prophylaxis may be equally effective in many cases, particularly in the context of modern bleeding management. Until high-quality trials provide definitive answers, clinicians should weigh the risks and benefits on a case-by-case basis, focusing on individual patient risk profiles.

Ultra-early (16 years) predictive model for MASLD

The ultra-early predictive model for **Metabolic Dysfunction–Associated Steatotic Liver Disease (MASLD)** is a promising development in preventive healthcare. This model relies on identifying specific protein changes in the blood, such as **GGT1**, which can signal a higher risk of developing MASLD up to **16 years before symptoms appear**. Here's a detailed explanation of the model: ### Key Features of the Predictive Model: 1. **Protein Biomarkers**: - Certain proteins, like **GGT1**, are associated with early metabolic changes that eventually lead to MASLD. - These protein changes can be detected in blood tests long before any physical symptoms or liver damage are evident. 2. **Integration with Health Measures**: - The predictive model becomes even more accurate when combined with simple health metrics such as: - **Body weight** - **Exercise levels** - **Other lifestyle factors** - This integration allows for a more comprehensive risk assessment. 3. **Ultra-Early Detection**: - The ability to detect MASLD risk up to **16 years in advance** is a groundbreaking feature. - This gives a long window of opportunity to implement preventive measures. 4. **Preventive Steps**: - Early identification of high-risk individuals allows doctors to recommend lifestyle changes, such as: - **Adopting a healthy diet** - **Increasing physical activity** - **Regular monitoring of liver health** - These steps can potentially prevent the onset of MASLD or slow its progression. 5. **Reducing the Burden of MASLD**: - MASLD is closely linked to conditions like **obesity**, **diabetes**, and **heart disease**. - By addressing risk factors early, this model could help reduce the growing prevalence of MASLD and its associated complications. 6. **Comparison to Heart Disease Risk Calculators**: - Similar to tools used for predicting heart disease risk, this model could become a standard tool for planning liver health. - It empowers both patients and doctors to make informed decisions about long-term health management. ### Potential Impact: - **Personalized Prevention**: - The model supports tailored interventions based on an individual's specific risk profile. - **Healthcare System Benefits**: - Early intervention could reduce the economic and healthcare burden associated with advanced liver disease. - **Public Health**: - Promoting awareness of MASLD risk factors could lead to healthier lifestyle choices on a broader scale. ### Next Steps: - **Further Research**: - While the study shows strong potential, more research is needed to validate and refine the model. - Large-scale studies and clinical trials will be essential to confirm its effectiveness. - **Implementation**: - Once validated, the model could be integrated into routine health check-ups, especially for individuals at higher risk due to obesity, diabetes, or other metabolic conditions. ### Conclusion: The ultra-early predictive model for MASLD represents a significant advancement in preventive medicine. By identifying high-risk individuals up to 16 years before symptoms appear, it offers a unique opportunity to intervene early with lifestyle changes and monitoring. This approach could help mitigate the rising burden of MASLD and improve long-term liver health outcomes.

Hepatic recompensation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis – What is new?

Hepatic recompensation in patients with decompensated cirrhosis has emerged as a transformative concept in liver disease management, challenging the long-held belief that cirrhosis is irreversible. Recent advancements have expanded our understanding of recompensation, defined by the Baveno VII consensus as control or cure of the underlying cause, resolution of ascites and encephalopathy without medication, no variceal bleeding for 12 months, and restoration of liver function to Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class A. Here's what's new in this field: --- ### **1. Paradigm Shift: Reversibility of Cirrhosis** Cirrhosis, once deemed a permanent condition, is now understood to be reversible in certain cases if the underlying causal factors are effectively managed. This shift has been driven by interventions targeting viral hepatitis, alcohol use disorder, autoimmune diseases, and metabolic dysfunction-associated liver disease (MASLD, formerly NAFLD). --- ### **2. Advances in Management of Underlying Causes** Recompensation is most achievable in cirrhosis caused by hepatitis C virus (HCV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and alcohol-related liver disease. Emerging evidence also suggests the possibility of recompensation in MASLD, autoimmune liver diseases, primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), and Wilson’s disease. #### **HCV:** - Direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) have revolutionized HCV treatment, achieving sustained virological response (SVR) in 80–90% of decompensated patients. - Approximately 25% of patients meet Baveno VII recompensation criteria post-treatment, with improved MELD/CTP scores and reduced complications. - However, the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) persists, necessitating ongoing surveillance. #### **HBV:** - Long-term nucleos(t)ide analogue therapy (e.g., entecavir, tenofovir) improves survival and reduces decompensation events in HBV-related cirrhosis. - Over 50% of patients in some cohorts achieve recompensation, demonstrating the effectiveness of antiviral therapy. #### **Alcohol-Associated Cirrhosis:** - Studies show that 8–18% of decompensated patients achieve recompensation with sustained abstinence. - Predictors of recompensation include lower baseline MELD scores, lower hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG), higher albumin levels, and female sex. - Relapse prevention remains critical to maintaining recompensation. #### **MASLD and Obesity:** - Although no standard drug therapy exists, weight loss (via lifestyle modifications or bariatric surgery in selected patients) has shown promise in improving liver function. - Early reports suggest that recompensation may be possible in MASLD-related cirrhosis, though further research is needed. #### **Autoimmune Liver Diseases and PBC:** - Small studies indicate that immunosuppressive therapy in autoimmune hepatitis and ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) in PBC can lead to recompensation. - However, progression and relapse remain common, and lifelong HCC surveillance is recommended. --- ### **3. Biological Mechanisms of Recompensation** Recompensation is driven by several biological processes, including: - **Collagen degradation and fibrosis regression:** Reduction of scar tissue improves liver architecture and function. - **Vascular remodeling:** Decreased portal hypertension reduces complications like ascites and variceal bleeding. - **Reduced hepatic inflammation:** Suppression of inflammatory pathways contributes to improved liver function. --- ### **4. Role of TIPS (Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt)** TIPS placement can control portal hypertension, ascites, and variceal bleeding. Approximately 24% of decompensated patients achieve recompensation post-TIPS, though it remains unclear whether the benefit is primarily due to TIPS itself or effective management of the underlying disease. --- ### **5. Predictive Models for Recompensation** Emerging predictive tools combine clinical and biochemical factors to estimate the likelihood of recompensation: - **BE3A (for HCV):** Incorporates bilirubin, albumin, and INR. - **BC2AID and Brec-PAS (for HBV):** Include bilirubin, albumin, INR, BMI, and complications. These models are promising but not yet widely adopted in clinical practice. --- ### **6. Persistent Portal Hypertension** Even after recompensation, portal hypertension may persist, requiring continued management: - HVPG reductions are not always accompanied by variceal regression, necessitating surveillance and beta-blocker use. - Non-selective beta-blockers should not be discontinued unless HVPG falls below 10 mmHg due to ongoing risk of rebleeding and decompensation. --- ### **7. Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) Risk** Recompensation lowers but does not eliminate HCC risk: - Annual HCC incidence rates remain at 1–3% in recompensated HBV and HCV cirrhosis patients. - Lifelong surveillance is essential, even for patients with functional recovery. --- ### **8. Transplant Delisting** Recompensation can lead to delisting from liver transplant waitlists: - Reports show that 6–10% of patients, particularly those with HBV, HCV, or alcohol-related cirrhosis, can be safely delisted due to clinical improvement. - This has significant implications for organ allocation and resource utilization. --- ### **9. Outcomes Compared to Compensated Cirrhosis** Recompensated patients achieve survival rates closer to those with compensated cirrhosis. However, they remain at higher risk of HCC and certain complications, necessitating ongoing monitoring and care. --- ### **10. Limitations of Current Criteria** The Baveno VII criteria for recompensation exclude patients on diuretics or prophylactic lactulose, potentially underestimating real-world recompensation rates. Many clinically improved patients remain on supportive medications, highlighting the need for more inclusive definitions. --- ### **11. Research Gaps and Future Directions** - **Mechanisms and Durability:** More prospective studies are needed to define the biological mechanisms, timelines, and long-term durability of recompensation. - **Biomarkers:** Current markers like MELD and CTP scores have limitations. Non-invasive biomarkers and machine learning models may improve patient selection and outcome prediction. - **Emerging Therapies:** Novel treatments targeting fibrosis regression, portal hypertension, and the gut-liver axis are under investigation. --- ### **12. Public Health Implications** Efforts to reduce alcohol consumption, eliminate viral hepatitis, and manage obesity could significantly increase recompensation rates, reduce liver transplant needs, and improve outcomes, especially in resource-limited settings. --- ### **Conclusion** The concept of hepatic recompensation represents a major advancement in the management of decompensated cirrhosis. While significant progress has been made in understanding its mechanisms and predictors, challenges remain in optimizing patient selection, improving long-term outcomes, and addressing persistent risks like portal hypertension and HCC. Ongoing research and public health initiatives hold promise for expanding the reach and impact of recompensation in cirrhosis care.

Acute variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension- APASL 2025

The management of **acute variceal bleeding (AVB)** in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension has been updated in the **Asia-Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) 2025 guidelines**. These guidelines emphasize early diagnosis, rapid intervention, and standardized care to improve outcomes and reduce mortality. Below is a detailed summary of the key aspects of AVB management as per the APASL 2025 recommendations: --- ### **Clinical Importance** - **Acute variceal bleeding (AVB)** is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension, with a **6-week mortality of 10–20%**. - Timely intervention and adherence to updated protocols are critical for improving survival rates. --- ### **Updated Definitions** 1. **AVB Definition**: - Defined as **hematemesis** (vomiting blood) or **melena** (black tarry stools) within **24 hours** of presentation in suspected portal hypertension. - This narrower definition helps distinguish AVB from re-bleeding episodes. 2. **Episode Duration**: - An AVB episode is defined as lasting **48 hours** from the onset of the first bleed (**T0**). - Any bleeding within this timeframe is considered part of the same episode. 3. **Re-Bleeding Categories**: - **Very early re-bleeding**: 48–120 hours. - **Early re-bleeding**: 6–42 days. - **Late re-bleeding**: Beyond 42 days. --- ### **Outcome Measures** - Expanded outcome measures include: - Survival rates. - Duration of ICU and hospital stay. - Development of new decompensations (e.g., ascites, jaundice, encephalopathy). - **MELD score** changes. - Quality of life assessments. --- ### **Time Zero (T0) and Home-to-Door Time** 1. **T0 (Time Zero)**: - Redefined as the **onset of the first bleed**, not hospital arrival. - This allows better assessment of pre-hospital delays and early interventions. 2. **Home-to-Door Time**: - Patients should reach the hospital ideally within **2 hours** (maximum **4 hours**) after the first bleed. - Delays beyond **6 hours** significantly increase mortality. --- ### **Diagnosis and Severity Assessment** 1. **Diagnosis**: - Initial evaluation includes: - **History**: Risk factors like alcohol use, hepatitis B/C, or metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). - **Physical exam**: Signs like ascites, jaundice, and splenomegaly. - **Laboratory tests**: Low platelets, high INR, elevated bilirubin. - **Imaging**: Ultrasound or CT for portal hypertension. - **Upper GI endoscopy** is the **gold standard** for diagnosis. 2. **Severity Assessment**: - Predictors of severe bleeding include: - High **hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG)**. - Alcoholic liver disease. - Infection. - High **Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP)** or **MELD** score. - Portal vein thrombosis. - Active bleeding on endoscopy. - The **APASL Bleed Severity Score** (0–7) is recommended for stratifying risk. --- ### **Pre-Hospital and Emergency Management** 1. **Initial Resuscitation**: - Prioritize **airway**, **breathing**, and **circulation** (ABC). - Use **conservative fluid resuscitation** to avoid overcorrection. - Target hemoglobin levels of **7–8 g/dL** with cautious transfusions. 2. **Pharmacotherapy**: - Start **vasoactive agents** (terlipressin, somatostatin, or octreotide) within **30 minutes** of the first bleed. - **Terlipressin infusion** is preferred. - Administer prophylactic **antibiotics** (e.g., ceftriaxone) for **2–5 days** to prevent infections. --- ### **Endoscopic Therapy** 1. **Timing**: - Endoscopy should be performed within **12 hours** of stabilization, preferably within **6 hours**. - Delayed endoscopy worsens outcomes. - Bedside endoscopy in the ICU is acceptable for unstable patients. 2. **Therapeutic Options**: - **Esophageal varices**: Endoscopic variceal ligation (**EVL**) is the first-line therapy. - **Gastric varices**: Cyanoacrylate glue injection is preferred. - Combination therapy (endoscopic + vasoactive drugs) is superior to either alone. 3. **Sedation and Prokinetics**: - **Propofol** or **midazolam** sedation is safe, but minimal intubation is advised. - Prokinetics (e.g., erythromycin, metoclopramide) improve mucosal visualization and reduce repeat procedures. --- ### **Rescue Therapies** - If bleeding persists despite combined medical and endoscopic treatment: 1. **Balloon tamponade** or **self-expanding metal stents** can provide temporary hemostasis. 2. **Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)**: - Recommended within **72 hours** (ideally <24 hours) for high-risk patients. - Improves survival in cases of uncontrolled bleeding. --- ### **Radiology and Surgery** 1. **Interventional Radiology**: - Plays a critical role in managing **complex gastric varices** or **refractory bleeding**. 2. **Surgical Options**: - Surgical shunts are rarely used but may be considered as a **last-resort option**. --- ### **Special Populations** 1. **Children**: - AVB management in children requires tailored approaches based on age and etiology. 2. **MASLD-Related Cirrhosis**: - AVB in metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease may require additional considerations. 3. **Patients on Anticoagulants**: - Risk–benefit assessment is crucial for balancing bleeding risk with thrombotic risk. 4. **Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC)**: - AVB in HCC patients requires individualized management. --- ### **Research and Future Directions** - **Artificial Intelligence (AI)**: Development of predictive models for AVB risk stratification. - **Novel Hemostatic Devices**: Research on innovative tools for bleeding control. - **Biomarkers**: Identification of better biomarkers for early diagnosis and prognosis. - **Early TIPS Trials**: Further studies on the timing and indications for early TIPS. - **Region-Specific Data**: Emphasis on generating data specific to Asia-Pacific populations. --- ### **Conclusion** The APASL 2025 guidelines provide a comprehensive framework for the management of acute variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Early diagnosis, rapid initiation of therapy, and standardized care, along with the use of advanced interventions like TIPS and interventional radiology, are key to improving patient outcomes. Tailored approaches for special populations and ongoing research into novel therapies are also prioritized.

Systemic therapies in patients HCC who also have advanced liver dysfunction (Child-Pugh class B)

GastroAGIDashboardDocumentsUpload DocumentsUsersUser ActivityRecent ChatSections ManageCustom QuestionsEmail TemplateConferenceGastroAGICirrhosis Liver2025NovemberClinical Challenge: Most pivotal HCC trials excluded Child-Pugh B patients, so systemic therapy in this group remains controversial. This leaves a large evidence gap for real-world decision-making. Guideline Variability: Western guidelines (AASLD, EASL, NCCN, ASCO, ESMO) differ in recommendations. Most endorse systemic therapy only in Child-Pugh A, with some cautiously allowing B7–B8 if performance status is good. Heterogeneity of Child-Pugh B: This class includes both compensated patients with mild biochemical abnormalities and decompensated patients with refractory ascites or encephalopathy. Prognosis varies widely within the subgroup. Survival Outcomes: Median overall survival drops dramatically: ~16 months in Child-Pugh A, ~6 months in Child-Pugh B, and <3 months in Child-Pugh C, underscoring the impact of liver dysfunction on prognosis. Alternative Assessments: Tools like ALBI grade and MELD score provide more objective measures of liver function, though they also have limitations. ALBI can stratify survival even within Child-Pugh A and B groups. Tumor-Related Dysfunction: Large tumors, macrovascular invasion, or necrosis can worsen liver function. In some cases, systemic therapy reducing tumor burden may improve hepatic reserve and allow “recompensation.” Cirrhosis-Related Dysfunction: Active viral hepatitis, alcohol use, or MASLD drive inflammation and decompensation. Managing these etiologies alongside systemic therapy is critical for patient stability. Recompensation Potential: Retrospective studies show recompensation in 12–56% of decompensated cirrhosis patients after etiological treatment (e.g., HBV antivirals, HCV DAAs, alcohol abstinence). This influences therapy eligibility. Portal Hypertension Management: Treating varices, portal vein thrombosis, and using non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic therapy lowers risks of decompensation and improves tolerance to cancer therapies. TKI Hepatotoxicity: Sorafenib, lenvatinib, Cabozantinib, and regorafenib can cause reversible hepatocyte injury. Adverse events like transaminase or bilirubin elevation occur in 10–25%, with <1% mortality. ICI Hepatotoxicity: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) bypass liver metabolism but may trigger immune-mediated hepatitis. Most cases resolve with corticosteroids, and low-grade events may correlate with better outcomes. Bleeding Risks: Anti-VEGF therapies (like bevacizumab) can cause variceal bleeding, though real-world rates are low (≈3%). Risk rises in patients with prior bleeds or macrovascular invasion. Potential Portal Pressure Benefit: Preclinical and pilot studies suggest VEGF blockade may reduce portal hypertension, but this remains experimental without large clinical validation. Sorafenib Data: The largest real-world registry (GIDEON) showed median OS of 5.2 months in Child-Pugh B versus 13.6 months in A. Adverse event rates were similar, but outcomes worsened with higher B scores. Other TKIs: Data for lenvatinib, regorafenib, and Cabozantinib in Child-Pugh B are limited. All confirm worse survival than in A patients but suggest possible modest benefit in carefully selected cases. Immunotherapy Evidence: CheckMate040 included Child-Pugh B patients, showing median OS of 7.6 months with nivolumab, with some patients improving from B to A after treatment response. Meta-Analyses: Pooled data confirm shorter survival in Child-Pugh B but show comparable safety and meaningful radiological responses (ORR ~14%, DCR ~46%), supporting cautious use. Comparative Studies: Retrospective cohorts suggest ICIs may provide better survival than TKIs or best supportive care (7.5 vs. 4 months). However, regional and selection biases limit generalizability. Decision Framework: Proposed algorithms suggest systemic therapy for B7 without ascites, possible therapy for B7 with ascites or B8 if recompensation potential exists, and best supportive care for B9 or unstable decompensation. Research Needs: Large prospective trials in Child-Pugh B are unlikely due to industry hesitancy, so real-world data, investigator-led studies, and biomarker-driven stratification are urgently needed to guide practice.astroAGIDashboardDocumentsUpload DocumentsUsersUser ActivityRecent ChatSections ManageCustom QuestionsEmail TemplateConferenceGastroAGICirrhosis Liver2025NovemberClinical Challenge: Most pivotal HCC trials excluded Child-Pugh B patients, so systemic therapy in this group remains controversial. This leaves a large evidence gap for real-world decision-making. Guideline Variability: Western guidelines (AASLD, EASL, NCCN, ASCO, ESMO) differ in recommendations. Most endorse systemic therapy only in Child-Pugh A, with some cautiously allowing B7–B8 if performance status is good. Heterogeneity of Child-Pugh B: This class includes both compensated patients with mild biochemical abnormalities and decompensated patients with refractory ascites or encephalopathy. Prognosis varies widely within the subgroup. Survival Outcomes: Median overall survival drops dramatically: ~16 months in Child-Pugh A, ~6 months in Child-Pugh B, and <3 months in Child-Pugh C, underscoring the impact of liver dysfunction on prognosis. Alternative Assessments: Tools like ALBI grade and MELD score provide more objective measures of liver function, though they also have limitations. ALBI can stratify survival even within Child-Pugh A and B groups. Tumor-Related Dysfunction: Large tumors, macrovascular invasion, or necrosis can worsen liver function. In some cases, systemic therapy reducing tumor burden may improve hepatic reserve and allow “recompensation.” Cirrhosis-Related Dysfunction: Active viral hepatitis, alcohol use, or MASLD drive inflammation and decompensation. Managing these etiologies alongside systemic therapy is critical for patient stability. Recompensation Potential: Retrospective studies show recompensation in 12–56% of decompensated cirrhosis patients after etiological treatment (e.g., HBV antivirals, HCV DAAs, alcohol abstinence). This influences therapy eligibility. Portal Hypertension Management: Treating varices, portal vein thrombosis, and using non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic therapy lowers risks of decompensation and improves tolerance to cancer therapies. TKI Hepatotoxicity: Sorafenib, lenvatinib, Cabozantinib, and regorafenib can cause reversible hepatocyte injury. Adverse events like transaminase or bilirubin elevation occur in 10–25%, with <1% mortality. ICI Hepatotoxicity: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) bypass liver metabolism but may trigger immune-mediated hepatitis. Most cases resolve with corticosteroids, and low-grade events may correlate with better outcomes. Bleeding Risks: Anti-VEGF therapies (like bevacizumab) can cause variceal bleeding, though real-world rates are low (≈3%). Risk rises in patients with prior bleeds or macrovascular invasion. Potential Portal Pressure Benefit: Preclinical and pilot studies suggest VEGF blockade may reduce portal hypertension, but this remains experimental without large clinical validation. Sorafenib Data: The largest real-world registry (GIDEON) showed median OS of 5.2 months in Child-Pugh B versus 13.6 months in A. Adverse event rates were similar, but outcomes worsened with higher B scores. Other TKIs: Data for lenvatinib, regorafenib, and Cabozantinib in Child-Pugh B are limited. All confirm worse survival than in A patients but suggest possible modest benefit in carefully selected cases. Immunotherapy Evidence: CheckMate040 included Child-Pugh B patients, showing median OS of 7.6 months with nivolumab, with some patients improving from B to A after treatment response. Meta-Analyses: Pooled data confirm shorter survival in Child-Pugh B but show comparable safety and meaningful radiological responses (ORR ~14%, DCR ~46%), supporting cautious use. Comparative Studies: Retrospective cohorts suggest ICIs may provide better survival than TKIs or best supportive care (7.5 vs. 4 months). However, regional and selection biases limit generalizability. Decision Framework: Proposed algorithms suggest systemic therapy for B7 without ascites, possible therapy for B7 with ascites or B8 if recompensation potential exists, and best supportive care for B9 or unstable decompensation. Research Needs: Large prospective trials in Child-Pugh B are unlikely due to industry hesitancy, so real-world data, investigator-led studies, and biomarker-driven stratification are urgently needed to guide practice.gastroAGIDashboardDocumentsUpload DocumentsUsersUser ActivityRecent ChatSections ManageCustom QuestionsEmail TemplateConferenceGastroAGICirrhosis Liver2025NovemberClinical Challenge: Most pivotal HCC trials excluded Child-Pugh B patients, so systemic therapy in this group remains controversial. This leaves a large evidence gap for real-world decision-making. Guideline Variability: Western guidelines (AASLD, EASL, NCCN, ASCO, ESMO) differ in recommendations. Most endorse systemic therapy only in Child-Pugh A, with some cautiously allowing B7–B8 if performance status is good. Heterogeneity of Child-Pugh B: This class includes both compensated patients with mild biochemical abnormalities and decompensated patients with refractory ascites or encephalopathy. Prognosis varies widely within the subgroup. Survival Outcomes: Median overall survival drops dramatically: ~16 months in Child-Pugh A, ~6 months in Child-Pugh B, and <3 months in Child-Pugh C, underscoring the impact of liver dysfunction on prognosis. Alternative Assessments: Tools like ALBI grade and MELD score provide more objective measures of liver function, though they also have limitations. ALBI can stratify survival even within Child-Pugh A and B groups. Tumor-Related Dysfunction: Large tumors, macrovascular invasion, or necrosis can worsen liver function. In some cases, systemic therapy reducing tumor burden may improve hepatic reserve and allow “recompensation.” Cirrhosis-Related Dysfunction: Active viral hepatitis, alcohol use, or MASLD drive inflammation and decompensation. Managing these etiologies alongside systemic therapy is critical for patient stability. Recompensation Potential: Retrospective studies show recompensation in 12–56% of decompensated cirrhosis patients after etiological treatment (e.g., HBV antivirals, HCV DAAs, alcohol abstinence). This influences therapy eligibility. Portal Hypertension Management: Treating varices, portal vein thrombosis, and using non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic therapy lowers risks of decompensation and improves tolerance to cancer therapies. TKI Hepatotoxicity: Sorafenib, lenvatinib, Cabozantinib, and regorafenib can cause reversible hepatocyte injury. Adverse events like transaminase or bilirubin elevation occur in 10–25%, with <1% mortality. ICI Hepatotoxicity: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) bypass liver metabolism but may trigger immune-mediated hepatitis. Most cases resolve with corticosteroids, and low-grade events may correlate with better outcomes. Bleeding Risks: Anti-VEGF therapies (like bevacizumab) can cause variceal bleeding, though real-world rates are low (≈3%). Risk rises in patients with prior bleeds or macrovascular invasion. Potential Portal Pressure Benefit: Preclinical and pilot studies suggest VEGF blockade may reduce portal hypertension, but this remains experimental without large clinical validation. Sorafenib Data: The largest real-world registry (GIDEON) showed median OS of 5.2 months in Child-Pugh B versus 13.6 months in A. Adverse event rates were similar, but outcomes worsened with higher B scores. Other TKIs: Data for lenvatinib, regorafenib, and Cabozantinib in Child-Pugh B are limited. All confirm worse survival than in A patients but suggest possible modest benefit in carefully selected cases. Immunotherapy Evidence: CheckMate040 included Child-Pugh B patients, showing median OS of 7.6 months with nivolumab, with some patients improving from B to A after treatment response. Meta-Analyses: Pooled data confirm shorter survival in Child-Pugh B but show comparable safety and meaningful radiological responses (ORR ~14%, DCR ~46%), supporting cautious use. Comparative Studies: Retrospective cohorts suggest ICIs may provide better survival than TKIs or best supportive care (7.5 vs. 4 months). However, regional and selection biases limit generalizability. Decision Framework: Proposed algorithms suggest systemic therapy for B7 without ascites, possible therapy for B7 with ascites or B8 if recompensation potential exists, and best supportive care for B9 or unstable decompensation. Research Needs: Large prospective trials in Child-Pugh B are unlikely due to industry hesitancy, so real-world data, investigator-led studies, and biomarker-driven stratification are urgently needed to guide practice.ystemic therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in patients with advanced liver dysfunction (Child-Pugh class B) is a complex and controversial area of clinical management. This is primarily due to the exclusion of Child-Pugh B patients from most pivotal HCC clinical trials, leaving a substantial evidence gap for real-world decision-making. Below is an in-depth exploration of the key considerations, challenges, and available data regarding systemic therapies in this patient population. Key Challenges in Treating Child-Pugh B Patients Liver Dysfunction and Prognosis: Child-Pugh B heterogeneity: This group includes both compensated patients with mild biochemical abnormalities (e.g., B7) and decompensated patients with severe complications like refractory ascites or hepatic encephalopathy (e.g., B8–B9). Prognosis varies widely within the subgroup. Survival outcomes: Median overall survival (OS) drops significantly with worsening liver dysfunction: ~16 months for Child-Pugh A 6 months for Child-Pugh B <3 months for Child-Pugh C Guideline Variability: Western guidelines (AASLD, EASL, NCCN, ASCO, ESMO) generally recommend systemic therapy only for Child-Pugh A patients. Some guidelines cautiously allow systemic therapy for Child-Pugh B patients (specifically B7–B8) if their performance status is good and liver dysfunction is not severe. There is no consensus on how to approach systemic therapy for Child-Pugh B patients, reflecting the lack of robust trial data. Tumor-Related vs. Cirrhosis-Related Dysfunction: Tumor-related dysfunction: Large tumors, macrovascular invasion, or necrosis may exacerbate liver dysfunction. In some cases, systemic therapy that reduces tumor burden may improve hepatic reserve and allow "recompensation." Cirrhosis-related dysfunction: Active etiologies, such as viral hepatitis, alcohol use, or metabolic-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), drive inflammation and decompensation. Addressing these factors alongside systemic therapy is critical for patient stability. Available Systemic Therapies and Evidence in Child-Pugh B Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs): Sorafenib: The largest real-world registry (GIDEON) showed median OS of 5.2 months in Child-Pugh B versus 13.6 months in Child-Pugh A. Adverse event rates were similar between Child-Pugh A and B, but outcomes worsened with higher B scores. Sorafenib is generally considered for carefully selected Child-Pugh B7 patients with compensated liver function and good performance status. Lenvatinib, Regorafenib, Cabozantinib: Data for these TKIs in Child-Pugh B patients are limited. All confirm worse survival compared to Child-Pugh A patients but suggest modest benefit in carefully selected cases. Hepatotoxicity is a concern, with reversible transaminase or bilirubin elevations occurring in 10–25% of cases, though mortality rates are <1%. Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors (ICIs): Nivolumab: CheckMate040 trial included Child-Pugh B patients, showing a median OS of 7.6 months with nivolumab. Some patients improved from Child-Pugh B to A after treatment response, indicating potential for hepatic recompensation. ICIs bypass liver metabolism but can trigger immune-mediated hepatitis, which is typically manageable with corticosteroids. Comparative outcomes: Retrospective studies suggest ICIs may provide better survival than TKIs or best supportive care (7.5 months vs. 4 months, respectively). Meta-analyses show comparable safety and meaningful radiological responses in Child-Pugh B patients, with an objective response rate (ORR) of 14% and disease control rate (DCR) of 46%. Anti-VEGF Therapies: Bevacizumab (combined with atezolizumab): Anti-VEGF therapies can cause variceal bleeding, especially in patients with portal hypertension or prior bleeds, though real-world rates are low (3%). Pilot studies suggest VEGF blockade may reduce portal hypertension, but this remains experimental and requires further validation. Potential for Recompensation Recompensation Strategies: Retrospective studies show recompensation in 12–56% of decompensated cirrhosis patients after etiological treatment (e.g., HBV antivirals, HCV DAAs, alcohol abstinence). Managing portal hypertension (e.g., treating varices, portal vein thrombosis, using non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic therapy) lowers risks of further decompensation and improves tolerance to cancer therapies. Impact on Therapy Eligibility: Patients who achieve recompensation may transition from Child-Pugh B to A, improving their eligibility for systemic therapy and prognosis. Decision Framework for Systemic Therapy in Child-Pugh B Proposed Algorithm: Child-Pugh B7: Without ascites: Systemic therapy may be considered, especially TKIs or ICIs. With ascites: Therapy may be cautiously attempted if recompensation potential exists. Child-Pugh B8: Therapy may be considered in select cases with stable decompensation and recompensation potential. Child-Pugh B9 or unstable decompensation: Best supportive care is generally recommended due to poor prognosis and inability to tolerate systemic therapy. Patient Selection: Careful selection based on performance status, liver dysfunction severity, and potential for hepatic recompensation is critical. Tools like ALBI grade and MELD score may provide more objective measures of liver function and help stratify survival within Child-Pugh B patients. Research Needs Real-World Data: Large prospective trials in Child-Pugh B patients are unlikely due to industry hesitancy. Therefore, real-world data, investigator-led studies, and biomarker-driven stratification are urgently needed to guide practice. Biomarker Development: Biomarkers predicting treatment response and hepatic recompensation potential could refine patient selection and improve outcomes. Comparative Studies: Head-to-head trials comparing ICIs, TKIs, and combination therapies specifically in Child-Pugh B patients are needed to establish optimal treatment strategies. Conclusion Systemic therapy in HCC patients with advanced liver dysfunction (Child-Pugh B) remains an area of significant clinical uncertainty. While TKIs like sorafenib and ICIs like nivolumab have shown modest benefits in carefully selected patients, the prognosis remains poor compared to Child-Pugh A patients. Managing underlying cirrhosis-related dysfunction, exploring recompensation strategies, and tailoring therapy based on performance status and liver function are essential. Continued research and real-world evidence are critical to addressing this unmet need.Generate AnswerUPDATE QUESTIONSrequestAnimationFrame(function(){RT=performance.now()});document.querySelectorAll('body link[rel="icon"], body link[rel="apple-touch-icon"]').forEach(el => document.head.appendChild(el))RB=[];RV=function(a){RT=performance.now();for(var b=0;b<a.length;b+=2){var c=a[b],e=a[b+1];null!==e.parentNode&&e.parentNode.removeChild(e);var f=c.parentNode;if(f){var g=c.previousSibling,h=0;do{if(c&&8===c.nodeType){var d=c.data;if("/"===d||"/&"===d)if(0===h)break;else h--;else""!==d&&"?"!==d&&""!==d&&"!"!==d&&"&"!==d||h++}d=c.nextSibling;f.removeChild(c);c=d}while(c);for(;e.firstChild;)f.insertBefore(e.firstChild,c);g.data="";g._reactRetry&&requestAnimationFrame(g._reactRetry)}}a.length=0}; RC=function(a,b){if(b=document.getElementById(b))(a=document.getElementById(a))?(a.previousSibling.data="",RB.push(a,b),2===RB.push(a,b),2===RB.push(a,b),2===RB.length&&("number"!==typeof RT?requestAnimationFrame(RT?requestAnimationFrame(RT?requestAnimationFrame(RV.bind(null,RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout(RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout(RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout(RV.bind(null,RB),2300>a&&2E3<a?2300-a:RT+300-a)))):b.parentNode.removeChild(b)};RC("B:0","S:0")(self.__next_f=self.__next_f||[]).push([0])self.__next_f.push([1,"8:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/next-devtools/userspace/app/segment-explorer-node.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"SegmentViewNode"]\na:"Sreact.fragment"\n19:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/lib/ReduxWrapper.tsx",["app/layout","static/chunks/app/layout.js"],"default"]\n1b:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/lib/ValidateProvider.tsx",["app/layout","static/chunks/app/layout.js"],"default"]\n1d:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/layout-router.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n1f:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/render-from-template-context.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n3a:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/route-guard/MainGuard.tsx",["app/(main)/layout","static/chunks/app/(main)/layout.js"],"default"]\n3c:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/layouts/MainLayout/index.tsx",["app/(main)/layout","static/chunks/app/(main)/layout.js"],"default"]\n55:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/main/custom-questions/CustomQuestions.tsx",["app/(main)/custom-questions/page","static/chunks/app/(main)/custom-questions/page.js"],"default"]\n58:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"OutletBoundary"]\n5f:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/metadata/async-metadata.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"AsyncMetadataOutlet"]\n67:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/"])self.__next_f.push([1,"node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"ViewportBoundary"]\n6e:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"MetadataBoundary"]\n73:"Sreact.suspense"\n77:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/builtin/global-error.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n91:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/metadata/generate/icon-mark.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"IconMark"]\n:HL["/_next/static/media/47cbc4e2adbc5db9-s.p.woff2","font",{"crossOrigin":"","type":"font/woff2"}]\n:HL["/_next/static/css/app/layout.css?v=1763968758666","style"]\n:HL["/_next/static/css/app/(main)/layout.css?v=1763968758666","style"]\n:HL["/_next/static/css/app/(main)/custom-questions/page.css?v=1763968758666","style"]\n:N1763968758668.999\n3:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadFont(href,type,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n4:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n5:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n6:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n2:{"name":"Preloads","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{"preloadCallbacks":["3","4","5","6"]}}\n7:[]\n9:[]\nb:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\ne:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/clien"])self.__next_f.push([1,"t/components/layout-router.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n11:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/render-from-template-context.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n12:{}\n13:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n10:{"children":["","L11",null,"12",null,"13",1]}\n14:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\nf:{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","a",null,"10",null,"14",0],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":"Y","forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":"Y"}\n15:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\nd:{"name":"RootLayout","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{"children":["","Le",null,"f",null,"15",1],"params":"Y"}}\n16:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",26,87,25,1,false]]\n17:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",29,94,25,1,false]]\n18:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",32,98,25,1,false]]\n1a:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",33,102,25,1,false]]\n1c:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n1e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n20:[]\n22:{"name":"NotFound","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{}}\n23:{"name":"HTTPAccessErrorFallback","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"22","stack":[],"props":{"status":404,"message":"This page could not be found."}}\n24:[]\n25:[]\n26:[]\n27:[]\n28:[]\n29:[]\n2a:[]\n2b:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2c:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2d:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2f:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n34:{}\n35:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n33:{"children":["","L1f",null,"34",null,"35",1]}\n36:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Func"])self.__next_f.push([1,"tion.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n32:{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","a",null,"33",null,"36",0],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":"Y","forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":"Y"}\n37:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n31:{"name":"Layout","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{"children":["","L1d",null,"32",null,"37",1],"params":"Y"}}\n38:{"name":"LayoutWrapper","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"31","stack":[["Layout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/(main)/layout.tsx",12,87,11,16,false]],"props":{"children":"31:props:children"}}\n39:[["LayoutWrapper","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/features/layouts/index.tsx",37,95,19,98,false]]\n3b:[["LayoutWrapper","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/features/layouts/index.tsx",38,102,19,98,false]]\n3d:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n3e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n3f:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n41:{"name":"NotFound","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{}}\n42:{"name":"HTTPAccessErrorFallback","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"41","stack":[],"props":{"status":404,"message":"This page could not be found."}}\n43:[]\n44:[]\n45:[]\n46:[]\n47:[]\n48:[]\n49:[]\n4a:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4b:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4c:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4d:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4f:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n51:{"name":"page","key""])self.__next_f.push([1,":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{"params":"@52","searchParams":"@53"}}\n54:[["page","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/(main)/custom-questions/page.tsx",12,87,11,14,false]]\n56:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n57:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n5b:"EObject.defineProperty(async function getViewportReady() {\n await viewport();\n return undefined;\n },"name",{value:"getViewportReady"})"\n5a:{"name":"next_outlet_boundary","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{"ready":"5b"}}\n5d:{"name":"StreamingMetadataOutletImpl","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{}}\n5e:[]\n61:[]\n63:{"name":"NonIndex","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{"pagePath":"/custom-questions","statusCode":200,"isPossibleServerAction":false}}\n65:{"name":"ViewportTree","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{}}\n66:[]\n69:{"name":"next_viewport_boundary","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"65","stack":[],"props":{}}\n6a:[]\n6c:{"name":"MetadataTree","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{}}\n6d:[]\n70:{"name":"next_metadata_boundary","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"6c","stack":[],"props":{}}\n71:[]\n72:[]\n75:{"name":"MetadataResolver","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"70","stack":[],"props":{}}\n78:[]\n52:{}\n53:\n79:[]\n7a:[]\n7b:[]\n:W["warn","7b","5d","Server"," \u001b[33m\u001b[1m⚠\u001b[22m\u001b[39m Unsupported metadata themeColor is configured in metadata export in /custom-questions. Please move it to viewport export instead.\nRead more: https://nextjs.org/docs/app/api-reference/functions/generate-viewport"]\n7c:[]\n7d:[]\n7e"])self.__next_f.push([1,":[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n7f:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n80:[]\n81:[]\n82:[]\n83:[]\n84:[]\n85:[]\n86:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n87:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n88:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n89:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n8a:[]\n8b:[]\n8c:[]\n8d:[]\n8e:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n8f:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n90:[]\n1:D"2"\n1:null\nc:D"d"\n21:D"22"\n21:D"23"\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"21:[["","title",null,{"children":"404: This page could not be found."},"23","24",1],["","div",null,{"style":{"fontFamily":"system-ui,"Segoe UI",Roboto,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif,"Apple Color Emoji","Segoe UI Emoji"","height":"100vh","textAlign":"center","display":"flex","flexDirection":"column","alignItems":"center","justifyContent":"center"},"children":["","div",null,{"children":[["","style",null,{"dangerouslySetInnerHTML":{"__html":"body{color:#000;background:#fff;margin:0}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.3)}@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark){body{color:#fff;background:#000}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(255,255,255,.3)}}"}},"23","27",1],["","h1",null,{"className":"next-error-h1","style":{"display":"inline-block","margin":"0 20px 0 0","padding":"0 23px 0 0","fontSize":24,"fontWeight":500,"verticalAlign":"top","lineHeight":"49px"},"children":404},"23","28",1],["","div",null,{"style":{"display":"inline-block"},"children":["","h2",null,{"style":{"fontSize":14,"fontWeight":400,"lineHeight":"49px","margin":0},"children":"This page could not be found."},"23","2a",1]},"23","29",1]]},"23","26",1]},"23","25",1]]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"c:["","html",null,{"lang":"en","className":"w-[100dvw] h-[100dvh]","children":["","body",null,{"id":"body","className":"__variable_372368 antialiased font-sans bg-white ","children":["","L19",null,{"children":["","L1b",null,{"children":["","L1d",null,{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","L1f",null,{},null,"1e",1],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":["","L8","c-not-found",{"type":"not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js","children":["21",[]]},null,"20",0],"forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":[["","L8",null,{"type":"boundary:not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js@boundary"},null,"2b",1],"undefined","undefined",["","L8",null,{"type":"boundary:global-error","pagePath":"__next_builtin__global-error.js"},null,"2c",1]]},null,"1c",1]},"d","1a",1]},"d","18",1]},"d","17",1]},"d","16",1]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"30:D"31"\n30:D"38"\n40:D"41"\n40:D"42"\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"40:[["","title",null,{"children":"404: This page could not be found."},"42","43",1],["","div",null,{"style":"21:1:props:style","children":["","div",null,{"children":[["","style",null,{"dangerouslySetInnerHTML":{"__html":"body{color:#000;background:#fff;margin:0}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.3)}@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark){body{color:#fff;background:#000}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(255,255,255,.3)}}"}},"42","46",1],["","h1",null,{"className":"next-error-h1","style":"21:1:props:children:props:children:1:props:style","children":404},"42","47",1],["","div",null,{"style":"21:1:props:children:props:children:2:props:style","children":["","h2",null,{"style":"21:1:props:children:props:children:2:props:children:props:style","children":"This page could not be found."},"42","49",1]},"42","48",1]]},"42","45",1]},"42","44",1]]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"30:["","L3a",null,{"children":["","L3c",null,{"children":["","L1d",null,{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","L1f",null,{},null,"3e",1],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":["","L8","c-not-found",{"type":"not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js","children":["40",[]]},null,"3f",0],"forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":[["","L8",null,{"type":"boundary:not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js@boundary"},null,"4a",1],"undefined","undefined","undefined"]},null,"3d",1]},"38","3b",1]},"38","39",1]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"50:D"51"\n50:["","L55",null,{},"51","54",1]\n59:D"5a"\n5c:D"5d"\n5c:["","L5f",null,{"promise":"@60"},"5d","5e",1]\n62:D"63"\n62:null\n64:D"65"\n68:D"69"\n64:[["","L67",null,{"children":"L68"},"65","66",1],["","meta",null,{"name":"next-size-adjust","content":""},"65","6a",1]]\n6b:D"6c"\n6f:D"70"\n74:D"75"\n6f:["","div",null,{"hidden":true,"children":["","73",null,{"fallback":null,"children":"L74"},"70","72",1]},"70","71",1]\n6b:["","L6e",null,{"children":"6f"},"6c","6d",1]\n76:[]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"0:{"P":"1","b":"development","p":"","c":["","custom-questions?question=b66bcd26-e38e-4699-b668-62581e13ca68"],"i":false,"f":[[["",{"children":["(main)",{"children":["custom-questions",{"children":["PAGE?{"question":"b66bcd26-e38e-4699-b668-62581e13ca68"}",{}]}]}]},"undefined","undefined",true],["",["","L8","layout",{"type":"layout","pagePath":"layout.tsx","children":["","a","c",{"children":[[["","link","0",{"rel":"stylesheet","href":"/_next/static/css/app/layout.css?v=1763968758666","precedence":"next_static/css/app/layout.css","crossOrigin":"undefined","nonce":"undefined"},null,"b",0]],"c"]},null,"9",1]},null,"7",0],{"children":["(main)",["","L8","layout",{"type":"layout","pagePath":"(main)/layout.tsx","children":["","a","c",{"children":[[["","link","0",{"rel":"stylesheet","href":"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/layout.css?v=1763968758666","precedence":"next_static/css/app/(main)/layout.css","crossOrigin":"undefined","nonce":"undefined"},null,"2f",0]],"30"]},null,"2e",1]},null,"2d",0],{"children":["custom-questions",["","a","c",{"children":[null,["","L1d",null,{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","L1f",null,{},null,"4d",1],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":"undefined","forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":["undefined","undefined","undefined","undefined"]},null,"4c",1]]},null,"4b",0],{"children":["PAGE",["","a","c",{"children":[["","L8","c-page",{"type":"page","pagePath":"(main)/custom-questions/page.tsx","children":"50"},null,"4f",1],[["","link","0",{"rel":"stylesheet","href":"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/custom-questions/page.css?v=1763968758666","precedence":"next_static/css/app/(main)/custom-questions/page.css","crossOrigin":"undefined","nonce":"undefined"},null,"56",0]],["","L58",null,{"children":["L59","5c"]},null,"57",1]]},null,"4e",0],{},null,false]},null,false]},null,false]},null,false],["","a","h",{"children":["62","64","6b"]},null,"61",0],false]],"m":"W76","G":["77",["","L8","ge-svn",{"type":"global-error","pagePath":"__next_builtin__global-error.js","children":[]},null,"78",0]],"s":false,"S":false}\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"68:[["","meta","0",{"charSet":"utf-8"},"5a","79",0],["","meta","1",{"name":"viewport","content":"width=device-width, initial-scale=1"},"5a","7a",0]]\n59:null\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"60:{"metadata":[["","title","0",{"children":"Admin Panel | GastroAGI"},"5d","7c",0],["","meta","1",{"name":"description","content":"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel."},"5d","7d",0],["","link","2",{"rel":"author","href":"https://gastroagi.com"},"5d","7e",0],["","meta","3",{"name":"author","content":"GastroAGI Team"},"5d","7f",0],["","meta","4",{"name":"keywords","content":"GastroAGI Admin,Gastroenterology Dashboard,GastroAGI Management,Gastro AGI Backend,Admin Panel GastroAGI,Medical AI Admin,GastroAI Tools Admin"},"5d","80",0],["","meta","5",{"name":"creator","content":"GastroAGI Team"},"5d","81",0],["","meta","6",{"property":"og:title","content":"Admin Panel | GastroAGI"},"5d","82",0],["","meta","7",{"property":"og:description","content":"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel."},"5d","83",0],["","meta","8",{"property":"og:url","content":"https://gastroagi.com/admin"},"5d","84",0],["","meta","9",{"property":"og:site_name","content":"GastroAGI Admin"},"5d","85",0],["","meta","10",{"property":"og:image:type","content":"image/jpeg"},"5d","86",0],["","meta","11",{"property":"og:image:width","content":"5472"},"5d","87",0],["","meta","12",{"property":"og:image:height","content":"3648"},"5d","88",0],["","meta","13",{"property":"og:image","content":"http://localhost:5454/opengraph-image.jpg?7d84d2c790da1724"},"5d","89",0],["","meta","14",{"property":"og:type","content":"website"},"5d","8a",0],["","meta","15",{"name":"twitter:card","content":"summary_large_image"},"5d","8b",0],["","meta","16",{"name":"twitter:title","content":"Admin Panel | GastroAGI"},"5d","8c",0],["","meta","17",{"name":"twitter:description","content":"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel."},"5d","8d",0],["","meta","18",{"name":"twitter:image","content":"https://gastroagi.com/admin-og-image.png"},"5d","8e",0],["","link","19",{"rel":"icon","href":"/favicon.ico","type":"image/x-icon","sizes":"1829x2523"},"5d","8f",0],["","L91","20",{},"5d","90",0]],"error":null,"digest":"undefined"}\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"74:"60:metadata"\n"])Generate AnswerUPDATE QUESTIONSrequestAnimationFrame(function(){RT=performance.now()});document.querySelectorAll('body link[rel="icon"], body link[rel="apple-touch-icon"]').forEach(el => document.head.appendChild(el))RB=[];RV=function(a){RT=performance.now();for(var b=0;b<a.length;b+=2){var c=a[b],e=a[b+1];null!==e.parentNode&&e.parentNode.removeChild(e);var f=c.parentNode;if(f){var g=c.previousSibling,h=0;do{if(c&&8===c.nodeType){var d=c.data;if("/"===d||"/&"===d)if(0===h)break;else h--;else""!==d&&"?"!==d&&""!==d&&"!"!==d&&"&"!==d||h++}d=c.nextSibling;f.removeChild(c);c=d}while(c);for(;e.firstChild;)f.insertBefore(e.firstChild,c);g.data="";g._reactRetry&&requestAnimationFrame(g._reactRetry)}}a.length=0}; RC=function(a,b){if(b=document.getElementById(b))(a=document.getElementById(a))?(a.previousSibling.data="",RB.push(a,b),2===RB.push(a,b),2===RB.push(a,b),2===RB.length&&("number"!==typeof RT?requestAnimationFrame(RT?requestAnimationFrame(RT?requestAnimationFrame(RV.bind(null,RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout(RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout(RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout(RV.bind(null,RB),2300>a&&2E3<a?2300-a:RT+300-a)))):b.parentNode.removeChild(b)};RC("B:0","S:0")(self.__next_f=self.__next_f||[]).push([0])self.__next_f.push([1,"8:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/next-devtools/userspace/app/segment-explorer-node.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"SegmentViewNode"]\na:"Sreact.fragment"\n19:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/lib/ReduxWrapper.tsx",["app/layout","static/chunks/app/layout.js"],"default"]\n1b:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/lib/ValidateProvider.tsx",["app/layout","static/chunks/app/layout.js"],"default"]\n1d:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/layout-router.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n1f:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/render-from-template-context.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n3a:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/route-guard/MainGuard.tsx",["app/(main)/layout","static/chunks/app/(main)/layout.js"],"default"]\n3c:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/layouts/MainLayout/index.tsx",["app/(main)/layout","static/chunks/app/(main)/layout.js"],"default"]\n55:I["(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/main/sections/Sections.tsx",["app/(main)/sections/page","static/chunks/app/(main)/sections/page.js"],"default"]\n58:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"OutletBoundary"]\n5f:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/metadata/async-metadata.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"AsyncMetadataOutlet"]\n67:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/fram"])self.__next_f.push([1,"ework/boundary-components.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"ViewportBoundary"]\n6e:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"MetadataBoundary"]\n73:"Sreact.suspense"\n77:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/builtin/global-error.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n91:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/metadata/generate/icon-mark.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],"IconMark"]\n:HL["/_next/static/media/47cbc4e2adbc5db9-s.p.woff2","font",{"crossOrigin":"","type":"font/woff2"}]\n:HL["/_next/static/css/app/layout.css?v=1763968824704","style"]\n:HL["/_next/static/css/app/(main)/layout.css?v=1763968824704","style"]\n:HL["/_next/static/css/app/(main)/sections/page.css?v=1763968824704","style"]\n:N1763968824725.5613\n3:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadFont(href,type,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n4:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n5:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n6:"EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},"name",{value:""})"\n2:{"name":"Preloads","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{"preloadCallbacks":["3","4","5","6"]}}\n7:[]\n9:[]\nb:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\ne:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/layout-router.js",["app-p"])self.__next_f.push([1,"ages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n11:I["(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/render-from-template-context.js",["app-pages-internals","static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js"],""]\n12:{}\n13:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n10:{"children":["","L11",null,"12",null,"13",1]}\n14:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\nf:{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","a",null,"10",null,"14",0],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":"Y","forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":"Y"}\n15:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\nd:{"name":"RootLayout","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{"children":["","Le",null,"f",null,"15",1],"params":"Y"}}\n16:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",26,87,25,1,false]]\n17:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",29,94,25,1,false]]\n18:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",32,98,25,1,false]]\n1a:[["RootLayout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx",33,102,25,1,false]]\n1c:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n1e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n20:[]\n22:{"name":"NotFound","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{}}\n23:{"name":"HTTPAccessErrorFallback","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"22","stack":[],"props":{"status":404,"message":"This page could not be found."}}\n24:[]\n25:[]\n26:[]\n27:[]\n28:[]\n29:[]\n2a:[]\n2b:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2c:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2d:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2f:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n34:{}\n35:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n33:{"children":["","L1f",null,"34",null,"35",1]}\n36:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n32:{"paral"])self.__next_f.push([1,"lelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","a",null,"33",null,"36",0],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":"Y","forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":"Y"}\n37:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n31:{"name":"Layout","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{"children":["","L1d",null,"32",null,"37",1],"params":"Y"}}\n38:{"name":"LayoutWrapper","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"31","stack":[["Layout","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/(main)/layout.tsx",12,87,11,16,false]],"props":{"children":"31:props:children"}}\n39:[["LayoutWrapper","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/features/layouts/index.tsx",37,95,19,98,false]]\n3b:[["LayoutWrapper","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/features/layouts/index.tsx",38,102,19,98,false]]\n3d:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n3e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n3f:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n41:{"name":"NotFound","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{}}\n42:{"name":"HTTPAccessErrorFallback","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"41","stack":[],"props":{"status":404,"message":"This page could not be found."}}\n43:[]\n44:[]\n45:[]\n46:[]\n47:[]\n48:[]\n49:[]\n4a:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4b:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4c:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4d:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4e:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4f:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n51:{"name":"page","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Functi"])self.__next_f.push([1,"on.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{"params":"@52","searchParams":"@53"}}\n54:[["page","webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/(main)/sections/page.tsx",14,87,13,14,false]]\n56:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n57:[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]]\n5b:"EObject.defineProperty(async function getViewportReady() {\n await viewport();\n return undefined;\n },"name",{value:"getViewportReady"})"\n5a:{"name":"next_outlet_boundary","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{"ready":"5b"}}\n5d:{"name":"StreamingMetadataOutletImpl","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true],["Function.all","",0,0,0,0,true]],"props":{}}\n5e:[]\n61:[]\n63:{"name":"NonIndex","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{"pagePath":"/sections","statusCode":200,"isPossibleServerAction":false}}\n65:{"name":"ViewportTree","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{}}\n66:[]\n69:{"name":"next_viewport_boundary","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"65","stack":[],"props":{}}\n6a:[]\n6c:{"name":"MetadataTree","key":null,"env":"Server","stack":[],"props":{}}\n6d:[]\n70:{"name":"next_metadata_boundary","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"6c","stack":[],"props":{}}\n71:[]\n72:[]\n75:{"name":"MetadataResolver","key":null,"env":"Server","owner":"70","stack":[],"props":{}}\n78:[]\n52:{}\n53:\n79:[]\n7a:[]\n7b:[]\n:W["warn","7b","5d","Server"," \u001b[33m\u001b[1m⚠\u001b[22m\u001b[39m Unsupported metadata themeColor is configured in metadata export in /sections. Please move it to viewport export instead.\nRead more: https://nextjs.org/docs/app/api-reference/functions/generate-viewport"]\n7c:[]\n7d:[]\n7e:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n7f:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,"])self.__next_f.push([1,"false]]\n80:[]\n81:[]\n82:[]\n83:[]\n84:[]\n85:[]\n86:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n87:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n88:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n89:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n8a:[]\n8b:[]\n8c:[]\n8d:[]\n8e:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false],["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n8f:[["Array.map","",0,0,0,0,false]]\n90:[]\n1:D"2"\n1:null\nc:D"d"\n21:D"22"\n21:D"23"\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"21:[["","title",null,{"children":"404: This page could not be found."},"23","24",1],["","div",null,{"style":{"fontFamily":"system-ui,"Segoe UI",Roboto,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif,"Apple Color Emoji","Segoe UI Emoji"","height":"100vh","textAlign":"center","display":"flex","flexDirection":"column","alignItems":"center","justifyContent":"center"},"children":["","div",null,{"children":[["","style",null,{"dangerouslySetInnerHTML":{"__html":"body{color:#000;background:#fff;margin:0}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.3)}@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark){body{color:#fff;background:#000}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(255,255,255,.3)}}"}},"23","27",1],["","h1",null,{"className":"next-error-h1","style":{"display":"inline-block","margin":"0 20px 0 0","padding":"0 23px 0 0","fontSize":24,"fontWeight":500,"verticalAlign":"top","lineHeight":"49px"},"children":404},"23","28",1],["","div",null,{"style":{"display":"inline-block"},"children":["","h2",null,{"style":{"fontSize":14,"fontWeight":400,"lineHeight":"49px","margin":0},"children":"This page could not be found."},"23","2a",1]},"23","29",1]]},"23","26",1]},"23","25",1]]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"c:["","html",null,{"lang":"en","className":"w-[100dvw] h-[100dvh]","children":["","body",null,{"id":"body","className":"__variable_372368 antialiased font-sans bg-white ","children":["","L19",null,{"children":["","L1b",null,{"children":["","L1d",null,{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","L1f",null,{},null,"1e",1],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":["","L8","c-not-found",{"type":"not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js","children":["21",[]]},null,"20",0],"forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":[["","L8",null,{"type":"boundary:not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js@boundary"},null,"2b",1],"undefined","undefined",["","L8",null,{"type":"boundary:global-error","pagePath":"__next_builtin__global-error.js"},null,"2c",1]]},null,"1c",1]},"d","1a",1]},"d","18",1]},"d","17",1]},"d","16",1]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"30:D"31"\n30:D"38"\n40:D"41"\n40:D"42"\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"40:[["","title",null,{"children":"404: This page could not be found."},"42","43",1],["","div",null,{"style":"21:1:props:style","children":["","div",null,{"children":[["","style",null,{"dangerouslySetInnerHTML":{"__html":"body{color:#000;background:#fff;margin:0}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.3)}@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark){body{color:#fff;background:#000}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(255,255,255,.3)}}"}},"42","46",1],["","h1",null,{"className":"next-error-h1","style":"21:1:props:children:props:children:1:props:style","children":404},"42","47",1],["","div",null,{"style":"21:1:props:children:props:children:2:props:style","children":["","h2",null,{"style":"21:1:props:children:props:children:2:props:children:props:style","children":"This page could not be found."},"42","49",1]},"42","48",1]]},"42","45",1]},"42","44",1]]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"30:["","L3a",null,{"children":["","L3c",null,{"children":["","L1d",null,{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","L1f",null,{},null,"3e",1],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":["","L8","c-not-found",{"type":"not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js","children":["40",[]]},null,"3f",0],"forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":[["","L8",null,{"type":"boundary:not-found","pagePath":"__next_builtin__not-found.js@boundary"},null,"4a",1],"undefined","undefined","undefined"]},null,"3d",1]},"38","3b",1]},"38","39",1]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"50:D"51"\n50:["","L55",null,{},"51","54",1]\n59:D"5a"\n5c:D"5d"\n5c:["","L5f",null,{"promise":"@60"},"5d","5e",1]\n62:D"63"\n62:null\n64:D"65"\n68:D"69"\n64:[["","L67",null,{"children":"L68"},"65","66",1],["","meta",null,{"name":"next-size-adjust","content":""},"65","6a",1]]\n6b:D"6c"\n6f:D"70"\n74:D"75"\n6f:["","div",null,{"hidden":true,"children":["","73",null,{"fallback":null,"children":"L74"},"70","72",1]},"70","71",1]\n6b:["","L6e",null,{"children":"6f"},"6c","6d",1]\n76:[]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"0:{"P":"1","b":"development","p":"","c":["","sections"],"i":false,"f":[[["",{"children":["(main)",{"children":["sections",{"children":["PAGE",{}]}]}]},"undefined","undefined",true],["",["","L8","layout",{"type":"layout","pagePath":"layout.tsx","children":["","a","c",{"children":[[["","link","0",{"rel":"stylesheet","href":"/_next/static/css/app/layout.css?v=1763968824704","precedence":"next_static/css/app/layout.css","crossOrigin":"undefined","nonce":"undefined"},null,"b",0]],"c"]},null,"9",1]},null,"7",0],{"children":["(main)",["","L8","layout",{"type":"layout","pagePath":"(main)/layout.tsx","children":["","a","c",{"children":[[["","link","0",{"rel":"stylesheet","href":"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/layout.css?v=1763968824704","precedence":"next_static/css/app/(main)/layout.css","crossOrigin":"undefined","nonce":"undefined"},null,"2f",0]],"30"]},null,"2e",1]},null,"2d",0],{"children":["sections",["","a","c",{"children":[null,["","L1d",null,{"parallelRouterKey":"children","error":"undefined","errorStyles":"undefined","errorScripts":"undefined","template":["","L1f",null,{},null,"4d",1],"templateStyles":"undefined","templateScripts":"undefined","notFound":"undefined","forbidden":"undefined","unauthorized":"undefined","segmentViewBoundaries":["undefined","undefined","undefined","undefined"]},null,"4c",1]]},null,"4b",0],{"children":["PAGE",["","a","c",{"children":[["","L8","c-page",{"type":"page","pagePath":"(main)/sections/page.tsx","children":"50"},null,"4f",1],[["","link","0",{"rel":"stylesheet","href":"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/sections/page.css?v=1763968824704","precedence":"next_static/css/app/(main)/sections/page.css","crossOrigin":"undefined","nonce":"undefined"},null,"56",0]],["","L58",null,{"children":["L59","5c"]},null,"57",1]]},null,"4e",0],{},null,false]},null,false]},null,false]},null,false],["","a","h",{"children":["62","64","6b"]},null,"61",0],false]],"m":"W76","G":["77",["","L8","ge-svn",{"type":"global-error","pagePath":"__next_builtin__global-error.js","children":[]},null,"78",0]],"s":false,"S":false}\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"68:[["","meta","0",{"charSet":"utf-8"},"5a","79",0],["","meta","1",{"name":"viewport","content":"width=device-width, initial-scale=1"},"5a","7a",0]]\n59:null\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"60:{"metadata":[["","title","0",{"children":"Admin Panel | GastroAGI"},"5d","7c",0],["","meta","1",{"name":"description","content":"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel."},"5d","7d",0],["","link","2",{"rel":"author","href":"https://gastroagi.com"},"5d","7e",0],["","meta","3",{"name":"author","content":"GastroAGI Team"},"5d","7f",0],["","meta","4",{"name":"keywords","content":"GastroAGI Admin,Gastroenterology Dashboard,GastroAGI Management,Gastro AGI Backend,Admin Panel GastroAGI,Medical AI Admin,GastroAI Tools Admin"},"5d","80",0],["","meta","5",{"name":"creator","content":"GastroAGI Team"},"5d","81",0],["","meta","6",{"property":"og:title","content":"Admin Panel | GastroAGI"},"5d","82",0],["","meta","7",{"property":"og:description","content":"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel."},"5d","83",0],["","meta","8",{"property":"og:url","content":"https://gastroagi.com/admin"},"5d","84",0],["","meta","9",{"property":"og:site_name","content":"GastroAGI Admin"},"5d","85",0],["","meta","10",{"property":"og:image:type","content":"image/jpeg"},"5d","86",0],["","meta","11",{"property":"og:image:width","content":"5472"},"5d","87",0],["","meta","12",{"property":"og:image:height","content":"3648"},"5d","88",0],["","meta","13",{"property":"og:image","content":"http://localhost:5454/opengraph-image.jpg?7d84d2c790da1724"},"5d","89",0],["","meta","14",{"property":"og:type","content":"website"},"5d","8a",0],["","meta","15",{"name":"twitter:card","content":"summary_large_image"},"5d","8b",0],["","meta","16",{"name":"twitter:title","content":"Admin Panel | GastroAGI"},"5d","8c",0],["","meta","17",{"name":"twitter:description","content":"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel."},"5d","8d",0],["","meta","18",{"name":"twitter:image","content":"https://gastroagi.com/admin-og-image.png"},"5d","8e",0],["","link","19",{"rel":"icon","href":"/favicon.ico","type":"image/x-icon","sizes":"1829x2523"},"5d","8f",0],["","L91","20",{},"5d","90",0]],"error":null,"digest":"undefined"}\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"74:"60:metadata"\n"])Generate AnswerUPDATE QUESTIONSrequestAnimationFrame(function(){$RT=performance.now()});document.querySelectorAll('body link[rel="icon"], body link[rel="apple-touch-icon"]').forEach(el => document.head.appendChild(el))$RB=[];$RV=function(a){$RT=performance.now();for(var b=0;b<a.length;b+=2){var c=a[b],e=a[b+1];null!==e.parentNode&&e.parentNode.removeChild(e);var f=c.parentNode;if(f){var g=c.previousSibling,h=0;do{if(c&&8===c.nodeType){var d=c.data;if("/$"===d||"/&"===d)if(0===h)break;else h--;else"$"!==d&&"$?"!==d&&"$~"!==d&&"$!"!==d&&"&"!==d||h++}d=c.nextSibling;f.removeChild(c);c=d}while(c);for(;e.firstChild;)f.insertBefore(e.firstChild,c);g.data="$";g._reactRetry&&requestAnimationFrame(g._reactRetry)}}a.length=0}; $RC=function(a,b){if(b=document.getElementById(b))(a=document.getElementById(a))?(a.previousSibling.data="$~",$RB.push(a,b),2===$RB.length&&("number"!==typeof $RT?requestAnimationFrame($RV.bind(null,$RB)):(a=performance.now(),setTimeout($RV.bind(null,$RB),2300>a&&2E3<a?2300-a:$RT+300-a)))):b.parentNode.removeChild(b)};$RC("B:0","S:0")(self.__next_f=self.__next_f||[]).push([0])self.__next_f.push([1,"8:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/next-devtools/userspace/app/segment-explorer-node.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"SegmentViewNode\"]\na:\"$Sreact.fragment\"\n19:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./src/lib/ReduxWrapper.tsx\",[\"app/layout\",\"static/chunks/app/layout.js\"],\"default\"]\n1b:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./src/lib/ValidateProvider.tsx\",[\"app/layout\",\"static/chunks/app/layout.js\"],\"default\"]\n1d:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/layout-router.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"\"]\n1f:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/render-from-template-context.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"\"]\n3a:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/route-guard/MainGuard.tsx\",[\"app/(main)/layout\",\"static/chunks/app/(main)/layout.js\"],\"default\"]\n3c:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/layouts/MainLayout/index.tsx\",[\"app/(main)/layout\",\"static/chunks/app/(main)/layout.js\"],\"default\"]\n55:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./src/features/main/sections/Sections.tsx\",[\"app/(main)/sections/page\",\"static/chunks/app/(main)/sections/page.js\"],\"default\"]\n58:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"OutletBoundary\"]\n5f:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/metadata/async-metadata.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"AsyncMetadataOutlet\"]\n67:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/fram"])self.__next_f.push([1,"ework/boundary-components.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"ViewportBoundary\"]\n6e:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/framework/boundary-components.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"MetadataBoundary\"]\n73:\"$Sreact.suspense\"\n77:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/builtin/global-error.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"\"]\n91:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/lib/metadata/generate/icon-mark.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"IconMark\"]\n:HL[\"/_next/static/media/47cbc4e2adbc5db9-s.p.woff2\",\"font\",{\"crossOrigin\":\"\",\"type\":\"font/woff2\"}]\n:HL[\"/_next/static/css/app/layout.css?v=1763968824704\",\"style\"]\n:HL[\"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/layout.css?v=1763968824704\",\"style\"]\n:HL[\"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/sections/page.css?v=1763968824704\",\"style\"]\n:N1763968824725.5613\n3:\"$EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadFont(href,type,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},\\\"name\\\",{value:\\\"\\\"})\"\n4:\"$EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},\\\"name\\\",{value:\\\"\\\"})\"\n5:\"$EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},\\\"name\\\",{value:\\\"\\\"})\"\n6:\"$EObject.defineProperty(()=\u003e{ctx.componentMod.preloadStyle(fullHref,ctx.renderOpts.crossOrigin,ctx.nonce)},\\\"name\\\",{value:\\\"\\\"})\"\n2:{\"name\":\"Preloads\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{\"preloadCallbacks\":[\"$3\",\"$4\",\"$5\",\"$6\"]}}\n7:[]\n9:[]\nb:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\ne:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/layout-router.js\",[\"app-p"])self.__next_f.push([1,"ages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"\"]\n11:I[\"(app-pages-browser)/./node_modules/.pnpm/[email protected][email protected][email protected][email protected]/node_modules/next/dist/client/components/render-from-template-context.js\",[\"app-pages-internals\",\"static/chunks/app-pages-internals.js\"],\"\"]\n12:{}\n13:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n10:{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L11\",null,\"$12\",null,\"$13\",1]}\n14:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\nf:{\"parallelRouterKey\":\"children\",\"error\":\"$undefined\",\"errorStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"errorScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"template\":[\"$\",\"$a\",null,\"$10\",null,\"$14\",0],\"templateStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"templateScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"notFound\":\"$Y\",\"forbidden\":\"$undefined\",\"unauthorized\":\"$undefined\",\"segmentViewBoundaries\":\"$Y\"}\n15:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\nd:{\"name\":\"RootLayout\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$Le\",null,\"$f\",null,\"$15\",1],\"params\":\"$Y\"}}\n16:[[\"RootLayout\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx\",26,87,25,1,false]]\n17:[[\"RootLayout\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx\",29,94,25,1,false]]\n18:[[\"RootLayout\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx\",32,98,25,1,false]]\n1a:[[\"RootLayout\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/layout.tsx\",33,102,25,1,false]]\n1c:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n1e:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n20:[]\n22:{\"name\":\"NotFound\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{}}\n23:{\"name\":\"HTTPAccessErrorFallback\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"owner\":\"$22\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{\"status\":404,\"message\":\"This page could not be found.\"}}\n24:[]\n25:[]\n26:[]\n27:[]\n28:[]\n29:[]\n2a:[]\n2b:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2c:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2d:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2e:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n2f:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n34:{}\n35:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n33:{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L1f\",null,\"$34\",null,\"$35\",1]}\n36:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n32:{\"paral"])self.__next_f.push([1,"lelRouterKey\":\"children\",\"error\":\"$undefined\",\"errorStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"errorScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"template\":[\"$\",\"$a\",null,\"$33\",null,\"$36\",0],\"templateStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"templateScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"notFound\":\"$Y\",\"forbidden\":\"$undefined\",\"unauthorized\":\"$undefined\",\"segmentViewBoundaries\":\"$Y\"}\n37:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n31:{\"name\":\"Layout\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]],\"props\":{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L1d\",null,\"$32\",null,\"$37\",1],\"params\":\"$Y\"}}\n38:{\"name\":\"LayoutWrapper\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"owner\":\"$31\",\"stack\":[[\"Layout\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/(main)/layout.tsx\",12,87,11,16,false]],\"props\":{\"children\":\"$31:props:children\"}}\n39:[[\"LayoutWrapper\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/features/layouts/index.tsx\",37,95,19,98,false]]\n3b:[[\"LayoutWrapper\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/features/layouts/index.tsx\",38,102,19,98,false]]\n3d:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n3e:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n3f:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n41:{\"name\":\"NotFound\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]],\"props\":{}}\n42:{\"name\":\"HTTPAccessErrorFallback\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"owner\":\"$41\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{\"status\":404,\"message\":\"This page could not be found.\"}}\n43:[]\n44:[]\n45:[]\n46:[]\n47:[]\n48:[]\n49:[]\n4a:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4b:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4c:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4d:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4e:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n4f:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n51:{\"name\":\"page\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[[\"Functi"])self.__next_f.push([1,"on.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]],\"props\":{\"params\":\"$@52\",\"searchParams\":\"$@53\"}}\n54:[[\"page\",\"webpack-internal:///(rsc)/./src/app/(main)/sections/page.tsx\",14,87,13,14,false]]\n56:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n57:[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]]\n5b:\"$EObject.defineProperty(async function getViewportReady() {\\n await viewport();\\n return undefined;\\n },\\\"name\\\",{value:\\\"getViewportReady\\\"})\"\n5a:{\"name\":\"__next_outlet_boundary__\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]],\"props\":{\"ready\":\"$5b\"}}\n5d:{\"name\":\"StreamingMetadataOutletImpl\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true],[\"Function.all\",\"\",0,0,0,0,true]],\"props\":{}}\n5e:[]\n61:[]\n63:{\"name\":\"NonIndex\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{\"pagePath\":\"/sections\",\"statusCode\":200,\"isPossibleServerAction\":false}}\n65:{\"name\":\"ViewportTree\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{}}\n66:[]\n69:{\"name\":\"__next_viewport_boundary__\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"owner\":\"$65\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{}}\n6a:[]\n6c:{\"name\":\"MetadataTree\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{}}\n6d:[]\n70:{\"name\":\"__next_metadata_boundary__\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"owner\":\"$6c\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{}}\n71:[]\n72:[]\n75:{\"name\":\"MetadataResolver\",\"key\":null,\"env\":\"Server\",\"owner\":\"$70\",\"stack\":[],\"props\":{}}\n78:[]\n52:{}\n53:\n79:[]\n7a:[]\n7b:[]\n:W[\"warn\",\"$7b\",\"$5d\",\"Server\",\" \\u001b[33m\\u001b[1m⚠\\u001b[22m\\u001b[39m Unsupported metadata themeColor is configured in metadata export in /sections. Please move it to viewport export instead.\\nRead more: https://nextjs.org/docs/app/api-reference/functions/generate-viewport\"]\n7c:[]\n7d:[]\n7e:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n7f:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,"])self.__next_f.push([1,"false]]\n80:[]\n81:[]\n82:[]\n83:[]\n84:[]\n85:[]\n86:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n87:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n88:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n89:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n8a:[]\n8b:[]\n8c:[]\n8d:[]\n8e:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false],[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n8f:[[\"Array.map\",\"\",0,0,0,0,false]]\n90:[]\n1:D\"$2\"\n1:null\nc:D\"$d\"\n21:D\"$22\"\n21:D\"$23\"\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"21:[[\"$\",\"title\",null,{\"children\":\"404: This page could not be found.\"},\"$23\",\"$24\",1],[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"style\":{\"fontFamily\":\"system-ui,\\\"Segoe UI\\\",Roboto,Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif,\\\"Apple Color Emoji\\\",\\\"Segoe UI Emoji\\\"\",\"height\":\"100vh\",\"textAlign\":\"center\",\"display\":\"flex\",\"flexDirection\":\"column\",\"alignItems\":\"center\",\"justifyContent\":\"center\"},\"children\":[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"children\":[[\"$\",\"style\",null,{\"dangerouslySetInnerHTML\":{\"__html\":\"body{color:#000;background:#fff;margin:0}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.3)}@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark){body{color:#fff;background:#000}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(255,255,255,.3)}}\"}},\"$23\",\"$27\",1],[\"$\",\"h1\",null,{\"className\":\"next-error-h1\",\"style\":{\"display\":\"inline-block\",\"margin\":\"0 20px 0 0\",\"padding\":\"0 23px 0 0\",\"fontSize\":24,\"fontWeight\":500,\"verticalAlign\":\"top\",\"lineHeight\":\"49px\"},\"children\":404},\"$23\",\"$28\",1],[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"style\":{\"display\":\"inline-block\"},\"children\":[\"$\",\"h2\",null,{\"style\":{\"fontSize\":14,\"fontWeight\":400,\"lineHeight\":\"49px\",\"margin\":0},\"children\":\"This page could not be found.\"},\"$23\",\"$2a\",1]},\"$23\",\"$29\",1]]},\"$23\",\"$26\",1]},\"$23\",\"$25\",1]]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"c:[\"$\",\"html\",null,{\"lang\":\"en\",\"className\":\"w-[100dvw] h-[100dvh]\",\"children\":[\"$\",\"body\",null,{\"id\":\"body\",\"className\":\"__variable_372368 antialiased font-sans bg-white \",\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L19\",null,{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L1b\",null,{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L1d\",null,{\"parallelRouterKey\":\"children\",\"error\":\"$undefined\",\"errorStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"errorScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"template\":[\"$\",\"$L1f\",null,{},null,\"$1e\",1],\"templateStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"templateScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"notFound\":[\"$\",\"$L8\",\"c-not-found\",{\"type\":\"not-found\",\"pagePath\":\"__next_builtin__not-found.js\",\"children\":[\"$21\",[]]},null,\"$20\",0],\"forbidden\":\"$undefined\",\"unauthorized\":\"$undefined\",\"segmentViewBoundaries\":[[\"$\",\"$L8\",null,{\"type\":\"boundary:not-found\",\"pagePath\":\"__next_builtin__not-found.js@boundary\"},null,\"$2b\",1],\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\",[\"$\",\"$L8\",null,{\"type\":\"boundary:global-error\",\"pagePath\":\"__next_builtin__global-error.js\"},null,\"$2c\",1]]},null,\"$1c\",1]},\"$d\",\"$1a\",1]},\"$d\",\"$18\",1]},\"$d\",\"$17\",1]},\"$d\",\"$16\",1]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"30:D\"$31\"\n30:D\"$38\"\n40:D\"$41\"\n40:D\"$42\"\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"40:[[\"$\",\"title\",null,{\"children\":\"404: This page could not be found.\"},\"$42\",\"$43\",1],[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"style\":\"$21:1:props:style\",\"children\":[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"children\":[[\"$\",\"style\",null,{\"dangerouslySetInnerHTML\":{\"__html\":\"body{color:#000;background:#fff;margin:0}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(0,0,0,.3)}@media (prefers-color-scheme:dark){body{color:#fff;background:#000}.next-error-h1{border-right:1px solid rgba(255,255,255,.3)}}\"}},\"$42\",\"$46\",1],[\"$\",\"h1\",null,{\"className\":\"next-error-h1\",\"style\":\"$21:1:props:children:props:children:1:props:style\",\"children\":404},\"$42\",\"$47\",1],[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"style\":\"$21:1:props:children:props:children:2:props:style\",\"children\":[\"$\",\"h2\",null,{\"style\":\"$21:1:props:children:props:children:2:props:children:props:style\",\"children\":\"This page could not be found.\"},\"$42\",\"$49\",1]},\"$42\",\"$48\",1]]},\"$42\",\"$45\",1]},\"$42\",\"$44\",1]]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"30:[\"$\",\"$L3a\",null,{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L3c\",null,{\"children\":[\"$\",\"$L1d\",null,{\"parallelRouterKey\":\"children\",\"error\":\"$undefined\",\"errorStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"errorScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"template\":[\"$\",\"$L1f\",null,{},null,\"$3e\",1],\"templateStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"templateScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"notFound\":[\"$\",\"$L8\",\"c-not-found\",{\"type\":\"not-found\",\"pagePath\":\"__next_builtin__not-found.js\",\"children\":[\"$40\",[]]},null,\"$3f\",0],\"forbidden\":\"$undefined\",\"unauthorized\":\"$undefined\",\"segmentViewBoundaries\":[[\"$\",\"$L8\",null,{\"type\":\"boundary:not-found\",\"pagePath\":\"__next_builtin__not-found.js@boundary\"},null,\"$4a\",1],\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\"]},null,\"$3d\",1]},\"$38\",\"$3b\",1]},\"$38\",\"$39\",1]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"50:D\"$51\"\n50:[\"$\",\"$L55\",null,{},\"$51\",\"$54\",1]\n59:D\"$5a\"\n5c:D\"$5d\"\n5c:[\"$\",\"$L5f\",null,{\"promise\":\"$@60\"},\"$5d\",\"$5e\",1]\n62:D\"$63\"\n62:null\n64:D\"$65\"\n68:D\"$69\"\n64:[[\"$\",\"$L67\",null,{\"children\":\"$L68\"},\"$65\",\"$66\",1],[\"$\",\"meta\",null,{\"name\":\"next-size-adjust\",\"content\":\"\"},\"$65\",\"$6a\",1]]\n6b:D\"$6c\"\n6f:D\"$70\"\n74:D\"$75\"\n6f:[\"$\",\"div\",null,{\"hidden\":true,\"children\":[\"$\",\"$73\",null,{\"fallback\":null,\"children\":\"$L74\"},\"$70\",\"$72\",1]},\"$70\",\"$71\",1]\n6b:[\"$\",\"$L6e\",null,{\"children\":\"$6f\"},\"$6c\",\"$6d\",1]\n76:[]\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"0:{\"P\":\"$1\",\"b\":\"development\",\"p\":\"\",\"c\":[\"\",\"sections\"],\"i\":false,\"f\":[[[\"\",{\"children\":[\"(main)\",{\"children\":[\"sections\",{\"children\":[\"__PAGE__\",{}]}]}]},\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\",true],[\"\",[\"$\",\"$L8\",\"layout\",{\"type\":\"layout\",\"pagePath\":\"layout.tsx\",\"children\":[\"$\",\"$a\",\"c\",{\"children\":[[[\"$\",\"link\",\"0\",{\"rel\":\"stylesheet\",\"href\":\"/_next/static/css/app/layout.css?v=1763968824704\",\"precedence\":\"next_static/css/app/layout.css\",\"crossOrigin\":\"$undefined\",\"nonce\":\"$undefined\"},null,\"$b\",0]],\"$c\"]},null,\"$9\",1]},null,\"$7\",0],{\"children\":[\"(main)\",[\"$\",\"$L8\",\"layout\",{\"type\":\"layout\",\"pagePath\":\"(main)/layout.tsx\",\"children\":[\"$\",\"$a\",\"c\",{\"children\":[[[\"$\",\"link\",\"0\",{\"rel\":\"stylesheet\",\"href\":\"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/layout.css?v=1763968824704\",\"precedence\":\"next_static/css/app/(main)/layout.css\",\"crossOrigin\":\"$undefined\",\"nonce\":\"$undefined\"},null,\"$2f\",0]],\"$30\"]},null,\"$2e\",1]},null,\"$2d\",0],{\"children\":[\"sections\",[\"$\",\"$a\",\"c\",{\"children\":[null,[\"$\",\"$L1d\",null,{\"parallelRouterKey\":\"children\",\"error\":\"$undefined\",\"errorStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"errorScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"template\":[\"$\",\"$L1f\",null,{},null,\"$4d\",1],\"templateStyles\":\"$undefined\",\"templateScripts\":\"$undefined\",\"notFound\":\"$undefined\",\"forbidden\":\"$undefined\",\"unauthorized\":\"$undefined\",\"segmentViewBoundaries\":[\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\",\"$undefined\"]},null,\"$4c\",1]]},null,\"$4b\",0],{\"children\":[\"__PAGE__\",[\"$\",\"$a\",\"c\",{\"children\":[[\"$\",\"$L8\",\"c-page\",{\"type\":\"page\",\"pagePath\":\"(main)/sections/page.tsx\",\"children\":\"$50\"},null,\"$4f\",1],[[\"$\",\"link\",\"0\",{\"rel\":\"stylesheet\",\"href\":\"/_next/static/css/app/(main)/sections/page.css?v=1763968824704\",\"precedence\":\"next_static/css/app/(main)/sections/page.css\",\"crossOrigin\":\"$undefined\",\"nonce\":\"$undefined\"},null,\"$56\",0]],[\"$\",\"$L58\",null,{\"children\":[\"$L59\",\"$5c\"]},null,\"$57\",1]]},null,\"$4e\",0],{},null,false]},null,false]},null,false]},null,false],[\"$\",\"$a\",\"h\",{\"children\":[\"$62\",\"$64\",\"$6b\"]},null,\"$61\",0],false]],\"m\":\"$W76\",\"G\":[\"$77\",[\"$\",\"$L8\",\"ge-svn\",{\"type\":\"global-error\",\"pagePath\":\"__next_builtin__global-error.js\",\"children\":[]},null,\"$78\",0]],\"s\":false,\"S\":false}\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"68:[[\"$\",\"meta\",\"0\",{\"charSet\":\"utf-8\"},\"$5a\",\"$79\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"1\",{\"name\":\"viewport\",\"content\":\"width=device-width, initial-scale=1\"},\"$5a\",\"$7a\",0]]\n59:null\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"60:{\"metadata\":[[\"$\",\"title\",\"0\",{\"children\":\"Admin Panel | GastroAGI\"},\"$5d\",\"$7c\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"1\",{\"name\":\"description\",\"content\":\"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel.\"},\"$5d\",\"$7d\",0],[\"$\",\"link\",\"2\",{\"rel\":\"author\",\"href\":\"https://gastroagi.com\"},\"$5d\",\"$7e\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"3\",{\"name\":\"author\",\"content\":\"GastroAGI Team\"},\"$5d\",\"$7f\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"4\",{\"name\":\"keywords\",\"content\":\"GastroAGI Admin,Gastroenterology Dashboard,GastroAGI Management,Gastro AGI Backend,Admin Panel GastroAGI,Medical AI Admin,GastroAI Tools Admin\"},\"$5d\",\"$80\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"5\",{\"name\":\"creator\",\"content\":\"GastroAGI Team\"},\"$5d\",\"$81\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"6\",{\"property\":\"og:title\",\"content\":\"Admin Panel | GastroAGI\"},\"$5d\",\"$82\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"7\",{\"property\":\"og:description\",\"content\":\"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel.\"},\"$5d\",\"$83\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"8\",{\"property\":\"og:url\",\"content\":\"https://gastroagi.com/admin\"},\"$5d\",\"$84\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"9\",{\"property\":\"og:site_name\",\"content\":\"GastroAGI Admin\"},\"$5d\",\"$85\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"10\",{\"property\":\"og:image:type\",\"content\":\"image/jpeg\"},\"$5d\",\"$86\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"11\",{\"property\":\"og:image:width\",\"content\":\"5472\"},\"$5d\",\"$87\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"12\",{\"property\":\"og:image:height\",\"content\":\"3648\"},\"$5d\",\"$88\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"13\",{\"property\":\"og:image\",\"content\":\"http://localhost:5454/opengraph-image.jpg?7d84d2c790da1724\"},\"$5d\",\"$89\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"14\",{\"property\":\"og:type\",\"content\":\"website\"},\"$5d\",\"$8a\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"15\",{\"name\":\"twitter:card\",\"content\":\"summary_large_image\"},\"$5d\",\"$8b\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"16\",{\"name\":\"twitter:title\",\"content\":\"Admin Panel | GastroAGI\"},\"$5d\",\"$8c\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"17\",{\"name\":\"twitter:description\",\"content\":\"Manage GastroAGI content, users, and configurations through the Admin Panel.\"},\"$5d\",\"$8d\",0],[\"$\",\"meta\",\"18\",{\"name\":\"twitter:image\",\"content\":\"https://gastroagi.com/admin-og-image.png\"},\"$5d\",\"$8e\",0],[\"$\",\"link\",\"19\",{\"rel\":\"icon\",\"href\":\"/favicon.ico\",\"type\":\"image/x-icon\",\"sizes\":\"1829x2523\"},\"$5d\",\"$8f\",0],[\"$\",\"$L91\",\"20\",{},\"$5d\",\"$90\",0]],\"error\":null,\"digest\":\"$undefined\"}\n"])self.__next_f.push([1,"74:\"$60:metadata\"\n"])