Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Recurrent Hepatitis C Virus (recurrent + hepatitis_c_virus)
Selected AbstractsRecurrent hepatitis C virus disease after liver transplantation and concurrent biliary tract complications: poor outcomeCLINICAL TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 4 2006Lior H. Katz Abstract:, Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is particularly aggressive in the post-liver transplantation setting, with rapid progression of liver fibrosis. Biliary complications remain a significant cause of morbidity following liver transplantation. Post-cholecystectomy biliary strictures are associated with advanced hepatic fibrosis. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine whether the presence of biliary complications affects survival in liver transplant recipients with recurrent HCV disease. The files of liver transplant recipients (53.7% male; mean age 52.7 ± 10.3 yr) were reviewed for incidence, type and treatment of biliary complications, and findings were compared between those who developed recurrent HCV disease (n = 47, 83.9%) and those who did not (n = 9). Twenty-one biliary complications developed in 12 patients with recurrent HCV (25.5%). Treatment with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography with balloon dilatation and stent placement or surgical revision was successful in nine (75%). Three biliary complications developed in three patients with no recurrence (p = NS). There was no statistically significant association between recurrent HCV disease and biliary complications. However, among those with recurrent disease, the recurrence was severe in nine of 12 recipients with biliary complications (75%) but in only nine of 35 without biliary complications (26%) (p = 0.001). Death was documented in eight patients with severe recurrence (44.4%), including three (37.5%) with biliary complications and two (7%) with non-severe recurrence, neither of whom had biliary complications (p = 0.003). Antiviral treatment was successful in nine of 25 patients (36%) who received it. On multivariate analysis, biliary complications were a significant predictor of severe recurrence (OR 27.0, 95% confidence interval 2.07,351.4) (p = 0.012). Fibrosis stage in the second biopsy was significantly correlated with serum alanine aminotransferase (p = 0.01) and with duration of biliary obstruction (p = 0.07). In conclusion, biliary complications of liver transplantation strongly affect outcome in patients with recurrent HCV disease despite attempts to relieve the biliary obstruction and to treat the recurrent HCV disease. [source] Reply: Outcome of recurrent hepatitis C virus after liver transplantation in a randomized trial of tacrolimus monotherapy versus triple therapyLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 5 2010Dinesh Jothimani No abstract is available for this article. [source] A randomized, prospective, pharmacoeconomic trial of neoral 2-hour postdose concentration monitoring versus tacrolimus trough concentration monitoring in de novo liver transplant recipientsLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 2 2008Surendra Shenoy Two-hour postdose cyclosporine (C2) monitoring is becoming an accepted method of therapeutic drug monitoring, although it is not known whether C2 monitoring is superior to tacrolimus (FK)-based immunosuppression. The purpose of this trial was to compare the safety, efficacy, and pharmacoeconomics of cyclosporine A (CsA) monitored by C2 levels versus FK monitored by trough levels in de novo liver transplant recipients. After informed consent, 60 de novo liver transplant recipients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive either FK (trough, 6-10 ng/mL) or CsA (C2, 600-1200 ng/mL) and corticosteroids. The 2 groups were similar for gender, race, indication for liver disease, and age. At 1 year, patient survival was similar (93% for FK versus 90% for C2). One patient in the FK arm was retransplanted because of recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV). Early acute rejection occurred in 27% of FK-treated patients and 23% of CsA-treated recipients [P = not significant (NS)]. Recurrent HCV occurred in 21% of FK-treated patients and 61% of CsA-treated patient (P = 0.04). The incidence of other infections, new onset diabetes mellitus, requirement for antihypertensives, and requirement for cholesterol medications were similar between the groups. Annual calcineurin inhibitor costs were lower in the C2 arm ($5432 ± 2091 for C2 versus $8291 ± 3948 for FK, P = 0.001). Annual pretransplant drug costs ($2292 ± 2331 for C2 versus $2831 ± 2358 for FK, P = NS) and 1-year posttransplant drug costs ($17,214 ± 16,600 for C2 versus $15,151 ± 11,699 for FK, P = NS) were similar. In conclusion, immunosuppression with CsA, monitored by C2 levels, is safe, effective, and economical in liver transplant recipients and provides immunosuppression at least equivalent to that of FK. Liver Transpl 14:173,180, 2008. © 2008 AASLD. [source] Recurrent hepatitis C after liver transplantation: On-treatment prediction of response to peginterferon/ribavirin therapyLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 1 2008Ibrahim A. Hanouneh Sustained virologic response (SVR) in the treatment of recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection after liver transplantation (LT) remains suboptimal. We evaluated efficacy of pegylated interferon alfa (PEG) and ribavirin (RBV) (PEG/RBV) combination therapy in LT recipients with recurrent HCV and predictive values of rapid virological response (RVR) and early virologic response (EVR). Between January 2001 and October 2005, LT recipients with recurrent HCV were intended to be treated for 48 weeks with PEG/RBV combination therapy independent of genotype or virologic response [53 patients (79% genotype 1)]. On-treatment predictor of response at week 4 (RVR) was defined as undetectable HCV RNA, and at week 12 (EVR) as undetectable HCV RNA or a >2 log10 drop from pretreatment viral load. SVR was seen in 19 (35%) patients. Patients with genotype 2/3 were more likely to achieve SVR than those with genotype 1 (87% versus 23%; P = 0.001). The highest rate of SVR was seen in patients with RVR [specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) = 100%] while the highest rate of treatment failure was seen in those who did not have EVR [sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) = 100%]. The NPV of RVR to identify those who will not achieve SVR was also very high (88%). EVR had low PPV (63%) to identify those with SVR. In conclusion, PEG/RBV combination therapy is effective in the treatment of post-LT recurrent HCV. On-treatment virologic monitoring is highly predictive of SVR and may optimize the virologic response and minimize toxicity. Given its high PPV and NPV, RVR appears to be the most appropriate decision time point for continuation of therapy. Liver Transpl 14:53,58, 2008. © 2007 AASLD. [source] Recurrent hepatitis C after retransplantation: Factors affecting graft and patient outcome,LIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 12 2005Michal Carmiel-Haggai Retransplantation (re-LT) of patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) carries significant morbidity and mortality, negatively impacting on an already scarce donor allograft pool. In this study, we investigated the outcome of allografts and patients after re-LT due to recurrent HCV. Between 1989 and 2002, 47 patients were retransplanted at our institution due to HCV-related graft failure. Clinical HCV recurrence after re-LT was diagnosed when patients had acute liver enzyme elevation correlated with histological recurrence. The independent influence of these variables on survival was tested using Cox regression model. Chi-squared tests were used to examine the influence of individual demographic and pre/perioperative variables on recurrence. Thirty-one (66%) patients died after re-LT (median 2.2 months). Donor age >60, clinical HCV recurrence, and graft failure due to cirrhosis were significant risk factors for mortality (risk ratios of 3.6, 3.3, and 2.4, respectively). Pre-LT MELD score was lower among survivors (22± 5 vs. 27± 8). Following re-LT, 38 patients had at least one biopsy due to acute liver dysfunction; 19 of them (50%) had recurrence within the first 3 months. High-dose solumedrol was correlated with early recurrence. No association was found between time of recurrence after the first LT and time of recurrence after re-LT. In conclusion, patients with cirrhosis due to recurrent HCV undergoing re-LT have an extremely high mortality rate; older allografts should be avoided in retransplanting these patients. The timing of clinical recurrence after initial liver transplantation is not predictive of the timing of recurrence after re-LT. Patients experiencing early graft failure due to accelerated forms of HCV should not be denied re-LT with the expectation that a similar disease course will occur after re-LT. (Liver Transpl 2005;11:1567,1573.) [source] Controversies in the management of hepatitis C virus infection after liver transplantationLIVER TRANSPLANTATION, Issue 11 2003Mitchell L. Shiffman Recurrence of hepatitis C virus infection after liver transplantation is universal. A significant percentage of these patients develop progressive graft injury and cirrhosis. Those factors that modulate disease progression in liver transplant recipients with recurrent hepatitis C virus infection remain controversial and are poorly understood. Treatment of recurrent hepatitis C virus after liver transplantation with either interferon or interferon and ribavirin has yielded only limited success. Regardless of this, treatment is instituted. Peginterferon is more effective than standard interferon for treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection in the nontransplantation setting when used either alone or with ribavirin. The effectiveness of peginterferon, both with and without ribavirin in the posttransplantation setting, is currently being explored. In this review those factors thought to affect disease progression in patients with recurrent hepatitis C virus will be discussed, strategies that have been used to treat recurrent hepatitis C virus will be reviewed, and the impact that peginterferon may have on hepatitis C virus infection in the pretransplantation and posttransplantation setting will be explored. [source] | ||||||||||