Carvedilol versus traditional, non-selective beta-blockers for adults with cirrhosis and gastroesophageal varices.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zacharias AP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6517039 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Carvedilol versus traditional, non-selective beta-blockers for adults with cirrhosis and gastroesophageal varices.
Zacharias Antony P AP Jeyaraj Rebecca R Hobolth Lise L Bendtsen Flemming F Gluud Lise Lotte LL Morgan Marsha Y MY
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20181029
<h4>Background</h4>Non-selective beta-blockers are recommended for the prevention of bleeding in people with cirrhosis, portal hypertension and gastroesophageal varices. Carvedilol is a non-selective beta-blocker with additional intrinsic alpha<sub>1</sub>-blocking effects, which may be superior to traditional, non-selective beta-blockers in reducing portal pressure and, therefore, in reducing the risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.<h4>Objectives</h4>To assess the beneficial and harmful eff ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Recent evidence suggests that binding of agonist to its cognate receptor initiates not only classical G protein-mediated signaling, but also beta-arrestin-dependent signaling. One such beta-arrestin-mediated pathway uses the beta(1)-adrenergic receptor (beta(1)AR) to transactivate the EGFR. To determine whether beta-adrenergic ligands that do not activate G protein signaling (i.e., beta-blockers) can stabilize the beta(1)AR in a signaling conformation, we screened 20 beta-blockers for their ability to stimulate beta-arrestin-mediated EGFR transactivation. Here we show that only alprenolol (Alp) and carvedilol (Car) induce beta(1)AR-mediated transactivation of the EGFR and downstream ERK activation. By using mutants of the beta(1)AR lacking G protein-coupled receptor kinase phosphorylation sites and siRNA directed against beta-arrestin, we show that Alp- and Car-stimulated EGFR transactivation requires beta(1)AR phosphorylation at consensus G protein-coupled receptor kinase sites and beta-arrestin recruitment to the ligand-occupied receptor. Moreover, pharmacological inhibition of Src and EGFR blocked Alp- and Car-stimulated EGFR transactivation. Our findings demonstrate that Alp and Car are ligands that not only act as classical receptor antagonists, but can also stimulate signaling pathways in a G protein-independent, beta-arrestin-dependent fashion.
| S-EPMC2567217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsWe aimed to perform a network meta-analysis (NWM) to examine comparative effectiveness of non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) on prophylaxis of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding (GVB) and mortality benefit.MethodsMEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE databases were searched for eligible randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from inception to July 3, 2021. Outcomes of interest included primary/secondary prophylaxis of GVB, failure to achieve hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) decremental response, liver-related and all-cause mortality. A Bayesian NWM was performed to derive relative risk (RR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The ranking probability of each NSBB was assessed by surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).ResultsThirty-three RCTs including 3,188 cirrhosis patients with gastroesophageal varices were included. Compared with placebo, nadolol ranked first for reducing variceal bleeding [RR:0.25, (95% CrI:0.11-0.51); SUCRA:0.898], followed by carvedilol [RR:0.33, (95% CrI: 0.11-0.88); SUCRA:0.692] and propranolol [RR:0.52, (95% CrI:0.37-0.75); SUCRA:0.405]. Carvedilol was more effective than propranolol in achieving HVPG decremental response [RR:0.43, (95% CrI: 0.26-0.69)]. Carvedilol ranked first for reducing all-cause mortality [RR: 0.32, (95% CrI:0.17-0.57); SUCRA:0.963), followed by nadolol [RR:0.48, (95% CI:0.29-0.77); SUCRA:0.688], and propranolol [RR:0.77, (95% CI:0.58-1.02); SUCRA: 0.337]. Similar findings were observed for liver-related mortality. Carvedilol ranked the safest. The RR of adverse events was 4.38, (95% CrI:0.33-161.4); SUCRA:0.530, followed by propranolol [RR: 7.54, (95% CrI:1.90-47.89); SUCRA:0.360], and nadolol [RR: 18.24, (95% CrI:91.51-390.90); SUCRA:0.158].ConclusionsCarvedilol is the preferred NSBB with better survival benefit and lower occurrence of adverse events among patients with gastroesophageal varices.
| S-EPMC10412710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn this survey, we compared endoscopists' approach to treatment of gastroesophageal varices (GOV) in patients with cirrhosis between developed and developing countries. The objective of this study was to undertake a comparative analysis of the approaches employed by endoscopists in developed and developing countries with regard to the treatment of GOV in patients with cirrhosis.MethodsBetween Jan 2019 to Aug 2019, we administered a questionnaire-based online survey internationally via e-mail. A total of 148 endoscopists from five countries were invited to participate in the survey, and 93 responses were received (response rate: 62.8%). The questionnaire covered several aspects: characteristics of the respondents, primary prophylactics, endoscopic therapy, and secondary prophylactics for acute variceal bleeding (AVB). The answers were compared between developed and developing countries using the chi-square test. For all tests, a P value of < 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsThere was a significant difference between developed and developing countries in practice settings (P = 0.001), the years of independent gastroenterology or endoscopic practice (P = 0.036), treating non-hemorrhagic large gastric varices with medicine (P = 0.019), and selection of preferred initial endoscopic therapy for active gastric fundic variceal bleeding (P = 0.015). Notably, developed and developing countries did not significantly differ in terms of treatment of non-hemorrhagic esophageal varices (P = 0.076), initial endoscopic therapy for active gastric cardia variceal bleeding (P = 0.272), timing of secondary prophylaxis (P = 0.104), timing of endoscopy (P = 0.073), measures for secondary prophylaxis (P = 0.166), and basis for the selection of management preferences (P = 0.278).ConclusionThere were some differences in the practice of endoscopists for GOV in patients with cirrhosis between developing and developed countries. We speculate that these differences may affect the costs, management of primary bleeding, and chances of rebleeding in GOV. Furthermore, the equipment and technical conditions of different hospitals may also significantly influence the endoscopist's choice of treatment modality. We hope that future studies will place greater emphasis on this aspect as continuing education of and providing updated equipment to endoscopists are of paramount importance.
| S-EPMC11910852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) are the mainstay of treatment for portal hypertension in the setting of liver cirrhosis. Randomised controlled trials demonstrated their efficacy in preventing initial variceal bleeding and subsequent rebleeding. Recent evidence indicates that NSBBs could prevent liver decompensation in patients with compensated cirrhosis. Despite solid data favouring NSBB use in cirrhosis, some studies have highlighted relevant safety issues in patients with end-stage liver disease, particularly with refractory ascites and infection. This review summarises the evidence supporting current recommendations and restrictions of NSBB use in patients with cirrhosis.
| S-EPMC7005550 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We measured intestinal fatty acid-binding protein (I-FABP) levels, a useful marker of small intestinal mucosal injury, in patients with cirrhosis to determine their relationship with liver function and complications. This cross-sectional study included 71 patients with cirrhosis admitted for treatment of cirrhotic complications or hepatocellular carcinoma (cohort A) and 104 patients with cirrhosis who received direct-acting antiviral therapy for HCV (cohort B). I-FABP levels, measured by ELISA, were evaluated relative to hepatic reserve and compared with non-invasive scoring systems for diagnostic performance in cirrhotic complications. The median I-FABP level in both cohorts were significantly elevated in patients with reduced hepatic reserve (CTP grade A/BC cohort A, 2.33/3.17 ng/mL, p = 0.032; cohort B, 2.46/3.64 ng/mL, p = 0.008) and complications with gastroesophageal varices (GEV; GEV (-)/(+) cohort A, 1.66/3.67 ng/mL, p < 0.001; cohort B, 2.32/3.36 ng/mL; p = 0.003). Further, multiple logistic regression analysis identified I-FABP as the only factor contributing to GEV presence in both cohorts, which outperformed non-invasive scoring systems for GEV diagnosis (sensitivity 84.6%; specificity 84.2%; sensitivity 69.6%; specificity 63.8%, respectively). In conclusion, elevated small-intestinal mucosal injury in patients with cirrhosis was related to reduced hepatic reserve and GEV presence. I-FABP levels reflect portal hypertension and may be useful in cirrhosis management.
| S-EPMC11499902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose To assess the feasibility of four-dimensional (4D) flow MRI as a noninvasive imaging marker for stratifying the risk of variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. Materials and Methods This study recruited participants scheduled for both liver MRI and gastroesophageal endoscopy. Risk of variceal bleeding was assessed at endoscopy by using a three-point scale: no varices, low risk, and high risk requiring treatment. Four-dimensional flow MRI was used to create angiograms for evaluating visibility of varices and to measure flow volumes in main portal vein (PV), superior mesenteric vein, splenic vein (SV), and azygos vein. Fractional flow changes in PV and SV were calculated to quantify shunting (outflow) from PV and SV into varices. Logistic analysis was used to identify the independent indicator of high-risk varices. Results There were 23 participants (mean age, 52.3 years; age range, 25-75 years), including 14 men (mean age, 51.7 years; age range, 25-75 years) and nine women (mean age, 53.2 years; age range, 31-72 years) with no varices (n = 8), low-risk varices (n = 8), and high-risk varices (n = 7) determined at endoscopy. Four-dimensional flow MRI-based angiography helped radiologists to view varices in four of 15 participants with varices. Independent indicators of high-risk varices were flow volume in the azygos vein greater than 0.1 L/min (P = .034; 100% sensitivity [seven of seven] and 62% specificity [10 of 16]) and fractional flow change in PV of less than 0 (P < .001; 100% sensitivity [seven of seven] and 94% specificity [15 of 16]). Conclusion Azygos flow greater than 0.1 L/min and portal venous flow less than the sum of splenic and superior mesenteric vein flow are useful markers to stratify the risk of gastroesophageal varices bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
| S-EPMC6312435 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsLiver fibrosis blood tests, platelet count/spleen diameter ratio (PSR), and contrast-enhanced CT are diagnostic alternatives for gastroesophageal varices, but they have heterogeneous diagnostic performance among different study populations. Our study is aimed at evaluating their diagnostic accuracy for esophageal varices (EVs) and gastric varices (GVs) in cirrhotic patients with and without previous endoscopic variceal therapy.MethodsPatients with liver cirrhosis who underwent blood tests and contrast-enhanced CT scans as well as endoscopic surveillance should be potentially eligible. EVs needing treatment (EVNTs) and GVs needing treatment (GVNTs) were recorded according to the endoscopic results. Area under the curves (AUCs) were calculated.ResultsOverall, 279 patients were included. In 175 patients without previous endoscopic variceal therapy, including primary prophylaxis population (n = 70), acute bleeding population (n = 38), and previous bleeding population (n = 67), the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced CT for EVNTs was higher (AUCs = 0.816-0.876) as compared to blood tests and PSR; by comparison, the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced CT for GVNTs was statistically significant among primary prophylaxis population (AUC = 0.731, P = 0.0316), but not acute or previous bleeding population. In 104 patients with previous endoscopic variceal therapy (i.e., secondary prophylaxis population), contrast-enhanced CT was the only statistically significant alternative for diagnosing EVNTs and GVNTs but with modest accuracy (AUCs = 0.673 and 0.661, respectively).ConclusionsContrast-enhanced CT might be a diagnostic alternative for EVNTs in cirrhotic patients, but its diagnostic performance was slightly weakened in secondary prophylaxis population. Additionally, contrast-enhanced CT may be considered for diagnosis of GVNTs in primary prophylaxis population without previous endoscopic variceal therapy and secondary prophylaxis population.
| S-EPMC6855090 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Platelet count to spleen diameter ratio (PSR) was studied extensively as a noninvasive method of diagnosis for varices. The present study aimed to systematically assess the performance of PSR in the diagnosis of varices. PubMed, EMBASE, and article references were searched. The summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUSROCs), sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were calculated. The heterogeneity, quality, and publication bias of studies were evaluated. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed. A total of 49 papers were included. The AUSROCs of PSR for any varices and high-risk varices were 0.8719 and 0.8132, respectively. The summary sensitivities of PSR for any varices and high-risk varices were 0.84 and 0.78, respectively. The summary specificities of PSR for any varices and high-risk varices were 0.78 and 0.67, respectively. The AUSROC of PSR for any varices at the threshold of 909 was 0.8867. The AUSROC of PSR for any varices in viral liver cirrhosis was 0.8675. The overall quality of studies was moderate. Significant heterogeneity and publication bias existed in the study. In conclusion, PSR can be used to identify varices in liver cirrhosis. PSR had a high sensitivity in viral liver cirrhosis.
| S-EPMC5320338 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Some randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have tested the efficacy of beta-blockers as prophylactic agents on cancer therapy-induced cardiotoxicity; however, the quality of this evidence remains undetermined. This systematic review and meta-analysis study aims to evaluate the prophylactic effects of beta-blockers, especially carvedilol, on chemotherapy-induced cardiotoxicity. RCTs were identified by searching the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (OvidSP), Cochrane CENTRAL (OvidSP), etc., until December 2017. Inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trial and adult cancer patients started beta-blockers before chemotherapy. We evaluated the mean differences (MD) by fixed- or random-effects model and the odds ratio by Peto's method. Primary outcome was the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of patients after chemotherapy, and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, clinically overt cardiotoxicity, and other echocardiographic measurements. In total, we included six RCTs that used carvedilol as a prophylactic agent in patients receiving chemotherapy. The LVEF was not significantly distinct between those using carvedilol and placebo after chemotherapy (MD, 1.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), - 0.18 to 3.66; P = 0.08). The incidence of clinically overt cardiotoxicity was lower in the carvedilol group compared with the control group (Peto OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.89; P = 0.02). Furthermore, after chemotherapy, the LV end-diastolic diameter did not increase in the carvedilol group compared with the placebo group (MD, - 1.41; 95% CI, - 2.32 to - 0.50; P = 0.002). The prophylactic use of carvedilol exerted no impact on the early asymptomatic LVEF decrease but seemed to attenuate the frequency of clinically overt cardiotoxicity and prevent ventricular remodeling.
| S-EPMC6476829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & aimsNon-selective β blockers (NSBBs) may negatively influence renal function through decreasing heart rate and cardiac output. This study aimed to systematically investigate their association.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases were searched to identify all relevant studies evaluating the association of NSBBs with renal dysfunction in cirrhotic patients. Unadjusted and adjusted data were separately extracted. Odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled. Subgroup meta-analyses were performed according to the proportions of ascites and Child-Pugh class B/C and the mean model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.ResultsFourteen studies were finally included. Based on unadjusted data, NSBBs significantly increased the risk of developing renal dysfunction (OR = 1.49; p = 0.03), and this association remained significant in subgroup analyses of studies where the proportions of ascites was >70% and Child-Pugh class B/C was 100%. Based on adjusted data with propensity score matching (adjusted OR = 0.61; p = 0.08) and multivariable regression modelling (adjusted HR = 0.86; p = 0.713), NSBBs did not increase the risk of developing renal dysfunction, and this association remained not significant in subgroup analyses of studies where the proportions of ascites was >70% and <70%, the proportion of Child-Pugh class B/C was <100%, and the mean MELD score was <15. The quality of evidence was very low for all meta-analyses.ConclusionsNSBBs may not be associated with the development of renal dysfunction in liver cirrhosis. However, more evidence is required to clarify their association in specific populations.
| S-EPMC10812853 | biostudies-literature