Prevalence and clinical significance of clinically evident portal hypertension in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing transarterial chemoembolization. Issue 1 (16th December 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Müller, Lukas; Hahn, Felix; Mähringer‐Kunz, Aline; Stoehr, Fabian; Gairing, Simon Johannes; Foerster, Friedrich; Weinmann, Arndt; Galle, Peter Robert; Mittler, Jens; Pinto dos Santos, Daniel; Pitton, Michael Bernhard; Düber, Christoph; Fehrenbach, Uli; Auer, Timo Alexander; Gebauer, Bernhard; Kloeckner, Roman
• Is Part Of: United European Gastroenterology journal. Volume 10:Issue 1(2022)
• Page Start: 41
• Page End: 53
• Publication Date: 2021-12-16
• Subjects: cirrhosis -- clinically evident portal hypertension -- hepatocellular carcinoma -- liver cirrhosis -- long‐term outcomes -- portal hypertension -- prognosis -- survival -- transarterial chemoembolisation; Gastroenterology -- Periodicals; Periodicals; 616.33005
• DOI: 10.1002/ueg2.12188
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2050-6406

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Clinically evident portal hypertension (CEPH) was previously identified as a prognostic factor for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, little is known about the prognostic influence of CEPH on the long‐term outcome of patients with HCC undergoing transarterial chemoembolization (TACE), particularly in Western populations. Objectives: This study investigated the prevalence and prognostic influence of CEPH in a Western population of patients with HCC undergoing TACE. Methods: This retrospective study included 349 treatment‐naïve patients that received initial TACE treatment at our tertiary care center between January 2010 and November 2020. CEPH was defined as a combination of ascites, esophageal/gastric varices, splenomegaly and a low platelet count. We assessed the influence of CEPH and its defining factors on median overall survival (OS) in HCC patients. We compared the effects of CEPH to those of well‐known prognostic factors. Results: Of the 349 patients included, 304 (87.1%) patients had liver cirrhosis. CEPH was present in 241 (69.1%) patients. The median OS times were 10.6 months for patients with CEPH and 17.1 months for patients without CEPH (log rank p = 0.036). Median OS without a present surrogate was 17.1 months, while patients with one respectively more than two present CEPH surrogates had a median OS of 10.8 and 9.4 months (log rank p = 0.053). In multivariate analysis, CEPH was no significant risk factor for OS ( p = 0.190). Of the CEPH‐defining factors, only ascites reached significance in a univariate analysis. Conclusion: CEPH was present in more than two thirds of the patients with HCC undergoing TACE in our cohort of Western patients. Patients with CEPH had a significantly impaired survival in univariate analysis. However, no significance was reached in multivariate analysis. Thus, when TACE treatment is deemed oncologically reasonable, patients should not be excluded from TACE treatment due to the presence of surrogates of portal hypertension alone.