2.Recent Research Advance to Differentiate Portal Hypertension Associated with Primary Myelofibrosis and Cirrhosis --Review.
Rui LI ; Hua-Sheng LIU ; Ying CHEN
Journal of Experimental Hematology 2023;31(2):598-601
Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is easily confused with cirrhosis, due to its main clinical manifestations of splenomegaly and the blood cytopenia. This review focuses on clinical studies to identify primary myelofibrosis and cirrhosis related portal hypertension, to analyze the differences between the two diseases, in order to distinguish PMF and cirrhosis from the pathogenesis, clinical manifestations, laboratory examinations and treatment principles, and simultaneously improve clinicians' understanding of PMF, which is a reference for exploring the early screening or diagnostic indicators of PMF, also provides a clinical basis for the application of new targeted drugs such as ruxolitinib.
Humans
;
Primary Myelofibrosis/drug therapy*
;
Hypertension, Portal/complications*
;
Liver Cirrhosis/pathology*
;
Splenomegaly/pathology*
;
Anemia
5.Pharmacological Therapy of Portal Hypertension: Focused on Korean Data.
The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology 2005;45(6):381-386
Portal hypertension as a consequence of liver cirrhosis is responsible for serious complications such as variceal bleeding, ascites and hepatic encephalopathy. Successful pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension can prevent the risk of the variceal bleeding, and contribute to reduce the morbidity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. To identify the effect of drugs on portal hypertension, portal pressure was evaluated accurately before and after the drug administration. The hepatic venous pressure gradient has been accepted as the gold-standard method for assessing the severity of portal hypertension and the response to drug treatment. The mean hepatic venous pressure gradient was 15.1+/-5.4 mmHg in Korean cirrhotic patients who had experienced variceal bleeding. Non-selective beta blockers are the treatment of choice for primary and secondary prevention of variceal bleeding. The dose of propranolol should be subsequently adjusted until the resting heart rate had been reduced by 25% or less than 55 beats per minute. It has been reported that the optimal dose of propranolol is variable due to racial differences in cardiovascular receptor sensitivity. In Korean patients with portal hypertension and liver cirrhosis, the mean required dose of propranolol to reach target heart rate was 165 mg (range; 80-280 mg). This review covers mainly the results of the pharmacological therapy of portal hypertension in Korean cirrhotic patients.
Adrenergic beta-Antagonists/administration & dosage
;
Hepatic Veins
;
Humans
;
Hypertension, Portal/diagnosis/*drug therapy/physiopathology
;
Korea
;
Liver Cirrhosis/complications/physiopathology
;
Propranolol/administration & dosage
;
Venous Pressure/drug effects
6.Ascites, Hepatorenal Syndrome and Spontaneous Bacterial Peritonitis in Patients with Portal Hypertension.
The Korean Journal of Gastroenterology 2010;56(3):168-185
Ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and variceal hemorrhage are three major complications of portal hypertension. The diagnostic evaluation of ascites involves an assessment of its etiology by determining the serum-ascites albumin gradient and the exclusion of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. Ascites is primarily related to an inability to excrete an adequate amount of sodium into urine, leading to a positive sodium balance. Sodium restriction and diuretic therapy are keys of ascites control. But, with the case of refractory ascites, large volume paracentesis and transjugular portosystemic shunts are required. In hepatorenal syndrome, splanchnic vasodilatation with reduction in effective arterial volume causes intense renal vasoconstriction. Splanchnic and/or peripheral vasoconstrictors with albumin infusion, and renal replacement therapy are only bridging therapy. Liver transplantation is the only definitive modality of improving the long term prognosis.
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use
;
Ascites/complications/*diagnosis/therapy
;
Bacterial Infections/*diagnosis
;
Hepatic Encephalopathy/complications
;
Hepatorenal Syndrome/complications/*diagnosis/therapy
;
Humans
;
Hypertension, Portal/*complications
;
Liver Transplantation
;
Peritonitis/*diagnosis/drug therapy/etiology
;
Serum Albumin/administration & dosage
7.Diagnosis and treatment of mesenteric venous thrombosis: analysis of eleven cases.
Bao LIU ; Yong-jun LI ; Yue-hong ZHENG ; Chang-wei LIU ; Xiao-dong HE ; Chao-ji ZHENG ; Yu-pei ZHAO ; Heng GUAN
Acta Academiae Medicinae Sinicae 2003;25(2):190-192
OBJECTIVETo evaluate the diagnosis and treatment of mesenteric venous thrombosis.
METHODSThe clinical data of 11 cases diagnosed as mesenteric venous thrombosis between 1992 and 2001 in PUMC Hospital were analyzed retrospectively.
RESULTSPostoperative state(27.3%), especially cirrhosis and portal hypertension, and other history of thrombosis (27.3%) were the most common causes. Thrombolysis was performed successfully in two of the eleven cases. The rest of them were misdiagnosed in other hospitals and operated. No patient died after operation, and one (11.1%) recurrence was found.
CONCLUSIONSEarly application of anticoagulant is necessary for patients with thrombosis risks. For suspected patients, early computed tomography (CT) and DSA examination should be performed, and prompt thrombolysis and anticoagulation therapy can be performed to avoid the bowel resection after definite diagnosis. To reduce the recurrence, anticoagulant should be maintained for a proper time.
Adult ; Aged ; Diagnostic Errors ; Female ; Humans ; Hypertension, Portal ; surgery ; Male ; Mesenteric Veins ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications ; diagnosis ; drug therapy ; Retrospective Studies ; Thrombolytic Therapy ; Urokinase-Type Plasminogen Activator ; therapeutic use ; Venous Thrombosis ; diagnosis ; drug therapy
8.Effect of different doses of losartan on cirrhotic portal hypertensive colopathy in rats.
Li-Juan HUO ; Xiao-Dong HAN ; Ling-Lin TIAN
Chinese Journal of Hepatology 2010;18(1):69-70
Animals
;
Colon
;
blood supply
;
pathology
;
Colonic Diseases
;
drug therapy
;
etiology
;
physiopathology
;
Hemodynamics
;
Hepatic Veins
;
pathology
;
physiopathology
;
Hypertension, Portal
;
complications
;
physiopathology
;
Intestinal Mucosa
;
blood supply
;
drug effects
;
pathology
;
Liver Cirrhosis, Experimental
;
complications
;
Losartan
;
administration & dosage
;
therapeutic use
;
Male
;
Microscopy
;
Portal Pressure
;
drug effects
;
Random Allocation
;
Rats
;
Rats, Wistar
9.Comparison of Doppler Ultrasonography and Hepatic Venous Pressure Gradient in Assessing Portal Hypertension in Liver Cirrhosis.
Phil Ho JEONG ; Soon Koo BAIK ; Yeun Jong CHOI ; Dong Hoon PARK ; Moon Young KIM ; Hyun Soo KIM ; Dong Ki LEE ; Sang Ok KWON ; Young Ju KIM ; Joong Wha PARK ; Nam Dong KIM
The Korean Journal of Hepatology 2002;8(3):264-270
BACKGROUND/AIMS: This prospective study aimed to determine if Doppler ultrasonography can be representative of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) in assessing the severity of portal hypertension and response to drug reducing portal pressure. METHODS: The HVPG and the parameters of Doppler ultrasonography including portal venous velocity (PVV) and splenic venous velocity, the pulsatility and resistive index of hepatic, splenic and renal arteries were measured in 105 patients with liver cirrhosis. In 31 patients the changes of hepatic venous pressure gradient and portal venous velocity after administration of terlipressin were evaluated. The patients who showed a reduction in HVPG of more than 20% of the baseline were defined as responders to terlipressin. RESULTS: Any Doppler ultrasonographc parameters did not correlate with HVPG. Both HVPG and PVV showed a highly significant reduction after the administration of terlipressin(-28.3 +/- 3.9%, -31.2 +/- 2.2% respectively). However, PVV decreased significantly not only in responders(31.7 +/- 2.4%) but also in nonresponders(29.5 +/- 6.1%). CONCLUSION: Doppler ultrasonography can not be representative of HVPG in assessing the severity of portal hypertension and response to drug reducing portal pressure in liver cirrhosis.
Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use
;
Blood Flow Velocity
;
Comparative Study
;
English Abstract
;
Female
;
*Hepatic Veins
;
Human
;
Hypertension, Portal/drug therapy/etiology/physiopathology/*ultrasonography
;
Liver Cirrhosis/*complications
;
Lypressin/*analogs & derivatives/therapeutic use
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Prospective Studies
;
*Ultrasonography, Doppler
;
*Venous Pressure
10.Effects of candesartan and propranolol combination therapy versus propranolol monotherapy in reducing portal hypertension.
Jae Hyun KIM ; Jung Min KIM ; Youn Zoo CHO ; Ji Hoon NA ; Hyun Sik KIM ; Hyoun A KIM ; Hye Won KANG ; Soon Koo BAIK ; Sang Ok KWON ; Seung Hwan CHA ; Young Ju KIM ; Moon Young KIM
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology 2014;20(4):376-383
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) inhibit activated hepatic stellate cell contraction and are thought to reduce the dynamic portion of intrahepatic resistance. This study compared the effects of combined treatment using the ARB candesartan and propranolol versus propranolol monotherapy on portal pressure in patients with cirrhosis in a prospective, randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Between January 2008 and July 2009, 53 cirrhotic patients with clinically significant portal hypertension were randomized to receive either candesartan and propranolol combination therapy (26 patients) or propranolol monotherapy (27 patients). Before and 3 months after the administration of the planned medication, the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) was assessed in both groups. The dose of propranolol was subsequently increased from 20 mg bid until the target heart rate was reached, and the candesartan dose was fixed at 8 mg qd. The primary endpoint was the HVPG response rate; patients with an HVPG reduction of >20% of the baseline value or to <12 mmHg were defined as responders. RESULTS: The mean portal pressure declined significantly in both groups, from 16 mmHg (range, 12-28 mmHg) to 13.5 mmHg (range, 6-20 mmHg) in the combination group (P<0.05), and from 17 mmHg (range, 12-27 mmHg) to 14 mmHg (range, 7-25 mmHg) in the propranolol monotherapy group (P<0.05). However, the medication-induced pressure reduction did not differ significantly between the two groups [3.5 mmHg (range, -3-11 mmHg) vs. 3 mmHg (range, -8-10 mmHg), P=0.674]. The response rate (55.6% vs. 61.5%, P=0.435) and the reductions in mean blood pressure or heart rate also did not differ significantly between the combination and monotherapy groups. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of candesartan (an ARB) to propranolol confers no benefit relative to classical propranolol monotherapy for the treatment of portal hypertension, and is thus not recommended.
Adolescent
;
Adult
;
Aged
;
Antihypertensive Agents/*therapeutic use
;
Benzimidazoles/*therapeutic use
;
Blood Pressure
;
Drug Therapy, Combination
;
Female
;
Humans
;
Hypertension, Portal/complications/*drug therapy
;
Liver Cirrhosis/complications/diagnosis
;
Male
;
Middle Aged
;
Propranolol/*therapeutic use
;
Prospective Studies
;
Tetrazoles/*therapeutic use
;
Treatment Outcome
;
Young Adult