Dataset Information

Terlipressin versus norepinephrine in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) is a severe and progressive functional renal failure occurring in patients with cirrhosis and ascites. Terlipressin is recognized as an effective treatment of HRS, but it is expensive and not widely available. Norepinephrine could be an effective alternative. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of norepinephrine compared to terlipressin in the management of HRS.

Methods

We searched the Medline, Embase, Scopus, CENTRAL, Lilacs and Scielo databases for randomized trials of norepinephrine and terlipressin in the treatment of HRS up to January 2014. Two reviewers collected data and assessed the outcomes and risk of bias. The primary outcome was the reversal of HRS. Secondary outcomes were mortality, recurrence of HRS and adverse events.

Results

Four studies comprising 154 patients were included. All trials were considered to be at overall high risk of bias. There was no difference in the reversal of HRS (RR?=?0.97, 95% CI?=?0.76 to 1.23), mortality at 30 days (RR?=?0.89, 95% CI?=?0.68 to 1.17) and recurrence of HRS (RR?=?0.72; 95% CI?=?0.36 to 1.45) between norepinephrine and terlipressin. Adverse events were less common with norepinephrine (RR?=?0.36, 95% CI?=?0.15 to 0.83).

Conclusions

Norepinephrine seems to be an attractive alternative to terlipressin in the treatment of HRS and is associated with less adverse events. However, these findings are based on data extracted from only four small studies.

SUBMITTER: Nassar Junior AP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4159336 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The treatment of choice for hepatorenal syndrome-acute kidney injury (HRS-AKI) is vasoconstrictor therapy in combination with albumin, preferably norepinephrine or terlipressin as recommended by recent guidelines. In the absence of larger head-to-head trials comparing the efficacy of terlipressin and norepinephrine, meta-analysis of smaller studies can provide insights needed to understand the comparative effects of these medications. Additionally, recent changes in the HRS diagnosis and treatment guidelines underscore the need for newer analyses comparing terlipressin and norepinephrine. In this systematic review, we aimed to assess reversal of hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) and 1-month mortality in subjects receiving terlipressin or norepinephrine for the management of HRS-AKI. We searched literature databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Embase, and ResearchGate, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from January 2007 to June 2023 on June 26, 2023. Only trials comparing norepinephrine and albumin with terlipressin and albumin for the treatment of HRS-AKI in adults were included, and trials without HRS reversal as an endpoint or nonresponders were excluded. Pairwise meta-analyses with the random effects model were conducted to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for HRS reversal and 1-month mortality as primary outcomes. Additional outcomes assessed, included HRS recurrence, predictors of response, and incidence of adverse events (AEs). We used the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for quality assessment. We included 7 RCTs with a total of 376 subjects with HRS-AKI or HRS type 1. This meta-analysis showed numerically higher rates of HRS reversal (OR 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.80-2.22]; P = 0.22) and short-term survival (OR 1.50, 95% CI [0.64-3.53]; P = 0.26) with terlipressin, though these results did not reach statistical significance. Terlipressin was associated with AEs such as abdominal pain and diarrhea, whereas norepinephrine was associated with cardiovascular AEs such as chest pain and ischemia. Most of the AEs were reversible with a reduction in dose or discontinuation of therapy across both arms. Of the terlipressin-treated subjects, 5.3% discontinued therapy due to serious AEs compared to 2.7% of the norepinephrine-treated subjects. Limitations of this analysis included small sample size and study differences in HRS-AKI diagnostic criteria. As more studies using the new HRS-AKI criteria comparing terlipressin and norepinephrine are completed, a clearer understanding of the comparability of these 2 therapies will emerge.

Project description:IntroductionHepatorenal syndrome (HRS), a special form of acute kidney failure, is a rare, acute, life-threatening complication of cirrhosis and has a very poor prognosis. Terlipressin (TERLIVAZ®) is the first and only pharmacological treatment approved by Food and Drug Administration (September 2022) to improve kidney function for adults with HRS with rapid reduction in kidney function. We constructed a decision analytic economic model to estimate the cost per complete response/HRS reversal of terlipressin + albumin from a United States hospital perspective.MethodsA decision analytic model was developed to estimate the HRS treatment-related cost per response over an HRS hospitalization (assuming 14 days). Patients can experience either HRS reversal (complete response) or no HRS reversal (partial/no response) upon receipt of treatment. The efficacy, safety, and treatment duration data were from published head-to-head randomized international trials. Total treatment cost comprised drug acquisition and treatment-related costs (intensive care unit [ICU], dialysis [intermittent or continuous], pulse oximetry monitoring for terlipressin, and adverse events) sourced from the published literature. Cost per response, defined as the total treatment cost per HRS reversal was estimated for each treatment. The number needed to treat (NNT), defined as the number of patients treated to achieve HRS reversal in 1 additional patient, was estimated.ResultsCost per response of terlipressin + albumin was lower than midodrine and octreotide + albumin (M&O) (US$85,315 vs. $467,794) and norepinephrine + albumin ($81,614 vs. $139,324). NNT for HRS reversal was 2 patients with terlipressin + albumin vs. M&O + albumin and 4 patients with terlipressin + albumin vs. norepinephrine + albumin, respectively.ConclusionsThe analysis shows that terlipressin is a cost-effective treatment due to its higher efficacy and administration in the non-ICU setting. Terlipressin is a value-based treatment option for appropriate adults with HRS with rapid reduction in kidney function.

Project description:BackgroundCatecholamines are the first-line vasopressors used in patients with septic shock. However, the search for novel drug candidates is still of great importance due to the development of adrenergic hyposensitivity accompanied by a decrease in catecholamine activity. Terlipressin (TP) is a synthetic vasopressin analogue used in the management of patients with septic shock. In the current study, we aimed to compare the effects of TP and catecholamine infusion in treating septic shock patients.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted by searching articles published in PUBMED, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between inception and July 2018. We only selected randomized controlled trials evaluating the use of TP and catecholamine in adult patients with septic shock. The primary outcome was overall mortality. The secondary outcomes were the ICU length of stay, haemodynamic changes, tissue perfusion, renal function, and adverse events.ResultsA total of 9 studies with 850 participants were included in the analysis. Overall, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the TP and catecholamine groups (risk ratio(RR), 0.85 (0.70 to 1.03); P = 0.09). In patients < 60 years old, the mortality rate was lower in the TP group than in the catecholamine group (RR, 0.66 (0.50 to 0.86); P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the ICU length of stay (mean difference, MD), - 0.28 days; 95% confidence interval (CI), - 1.25 to 0.69; P = 0.58). Additionally, TP improved renal function. The creatinine level was decreased in patients who received TP therapy compared to catecholamine-treated participants (standard mean difference, SMD), - 0.65; 95% CI, - 1.09 to - 0.22; P = 0.003). No significant difference was found regarding the total adverse events (Odds Ratio(OR), 1.48(0.51 to 4.24); P = 0.47), whereas peripheral ischaemia was more common in the TP group (OR, 8.65(1.48 to 50.59); P = 0.02).ConclusionThe use of TP was associated with reduced mortality in septic shock patients less than 60 years old. TP may also improve renal function and cause more peripheral ischaemia. PROSPERO registry: CRD42016035872.