Slider Bild 2Slider Bild 3Slider Bild 5Slider Bild 9Slider Bild 4Slider Bild 6Slider Bild 13Slider Bild 7Slider Bild 1Slider Bild 11Slider Bild 8Slider Bild 12Slider Bild 10

19th ISAD

The International Liver Support Meeting Rostock

New outcome data on late stage organ support with albumin dialysis

Among different extracorporeal liver support systems, MARS® therapy belongs to the most studied methods in patients with liver failure with a proved beneficial effect on hepatic encephalopathy (HE), hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) or hyperbilirubinemia. However, a general survival advantage of any liver support for liver failure has not been shown yet and is restricted to meta-analyses or patient subgroups.

We studied the effects of MARS® therapy compared to standard medical treatment (SMT) in three separate patient cohorts, namely, in patients presented with acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), acute liver injury (ALI) and in those with graft dysfunction (GD).

We report on our experience over a 6.5 year period in patients with severe hepatic injury treated at the Medical Department of the University Hospital Muenster (Germany). 101 patients with ACLF (grade 1-3, CLIF-C-OF liver subscore=3) were identified and received either standard medical treatment (SMT, n=54) or SMT and MARS® (n=47). Second, the results of this retrospective analysis in ACLF-patients were tested against the RELIEF trial. In addition, 53 patients suffered from ALI of the native liver without a preexisting liver disease (SMT n = 31, MARS® n = 22) and 20 patients showed a severe GD after liver transplantation (SMT n = 10, MARS® n = 10) and were included in this retrospective analysis.

In all patient subgroups laboratory parameters (bilirubin and creatinine) improved by MARS® therapy independent of the underlying etiology. Additionally, in ACLF patients the short-term mortality (up to day 14) of the MARS® group was significantly reduced compared with SMT. Resulting in a reduced 14-day mortality rate in the MARS® group (9.5% vs. 50.0% with SMT, p=0.004), especially in patients with multi-organ failure (ACLF grade 2-3). Concerning the affected organ system, this effect of MARS® on mortality was particularly evident among patients with increased kidney, brain or coagulation CLIF-C-OF subscores. Subsequent reanalysis of the RELIEF dataset with adoption of the CLIF-classification resulted in similar findings. Concerning ALI and severe GD, no differences in 28-day mortality were observed in acute liver injury (MARS® 5.3% [95%CI: 0 - 15.3]; SMT 3.3% [95% CI: 0 – 9.8], p = 0.754) and GD (MARS® 20.0% [95% CI: 0 – 44.7], SMT 11.1% [95% CI: 0 – 31.7], p = 0.478). However, MARS® improved the patients’ bilirubin values for the short term compared to SMT alone. In patients with ALI, this response sustained even after end of MARS® therapy. Contrary, majority of patients with GD and initial response to MARS® therapy worsened in hyperbilirubinemia.

MARS® treatment was associated with an improved short-term survival of patients with ACLF and multi-organ failure. Among these high-risk patients, MARS® treatment might bridge to liver recovery or liver transplantation. Although not improving 28-day mortality, MARS® therapy increased short-term response in patients with ALI as well as with GD. Especially in acute hepatic injury, use of MARS® therapy resulted in a sustained stabilization of the liver function and improved liver regeneration. It might be hypothesized that short-term response to MARS® predicts further course of disease. Decisive for a successful therapy is the exact indication of the respective liver dialysis procedure for this very heterogeneous disease. Future studies are needed to define more accurate patient selection criteria for MARS® therapy.

Go back