Category Archives: Acute Med

Acute care of the medically sick adult

Acute Med, All Updates, Guidelines, ICU, Resus

It's a bit quiet in here

Leave a comment

Blogging has slowed a bit as I’ve been travelling to the UK and am running courses here all week.
Just in case you’re desperate to read something useful, I came across a guideline on The Management of Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Adults by the Joint British Diabetes Societies Inpatient Care Group
The guideline contain the following approaches:

  • Measurement of blood ketones, venous (not arterial) pH and bicarbonate and their use as treatment markers
  • Monitoring of ketones and glucose using bedside meters when available and operating within their quality assurance range
  • Replacing ‘sliding scale’ insulin with weight-based fixed rate intravenous insulin infusion (IVII)
  • Use of venous blood rather than arterial blood in blood gas analysers
  • Monitoring of electrolytes on the blood gas analyser with intermittent laboratory confirmation
  • Continuation of long acting insulin analogues (Lantus® or Levemir®) as normal
  • Involvement diabetes specialist team as soon as possible

There is also a section on ‘Controversial Areas’, discussing such issues as bicarbonate therapy, rate of fluid therapy, and even 0.9% saline versus Hartmann’s (Ringer’s Lactate) solution, although this part was desperately disappointing, with the following bizarre excuse given for not recommending the latter:
“In theory replacement with glucose and compound sodium lactate (Hartmann’s solution) with potassium, would prevent hyperchloraemic metabolic acidosis, as well as allow appropriate potassium replacement. However, at present this is not readily available as a licensed infusion fluid.”
Apart from that, this appears to be an interesting and potentially useful document.
The Management of Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Adults
Joint British Diabetes Societies Inpatient Care Group

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU, PHARM, Resus

Status epilepticus review

Leave a comment

A review on status epilepticus, differentiating complex partial status from generalised convulsive status:

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Status epilepticus is one of the most common emergencies in neurology, and every third patient does not respond to adequate first-line treatment. Refractory status epilepticus may be associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and new treatment options are urgently required. This review critically discusses recently published data regarding the role of ‘new’ antiepileptic drugs, the efficacy and safety of anesthetic agents, and the overall clinical outcome that is an integral part of treatment decisions.
RECENT FINDINGS: In complex partial status epilepticus, levetiracetam may be administered after failure of first-line and/or second-line agents. Lacosamide may be an interesting new adjunct, but reliable data are pending. In the treatment of refractory generalized convulsive status epilepticus, propofol seems to be as efficient as barbiturates. The latter are associated with prolonged ventilation times due to redistribution kinetics, whereas the former bears the risk of propofol infusion syndrome if administered continuously. Even after prolonged treatment with anesthetics over weeks, survival with satisfactory functional outcome is possible.
SUMMARY: Unambiguous recommendations regarding treatment strategies for refractory status epilepticus are limited by a lack of reliable data. Therefore, randomized controlled trials or at least prospective observational studies based on strict protocols incorporating long-term outcome data are urgently required.

Treatment strategies for refractory status epilepticus
Curr Opin Crit Care. 2011 Apr;17(2):94-100

Acute Med, All Updates, Guidelines, ICU, PHARM, Resus

STEMI criteria vary with age and sex

Leave a comment

On reading through the 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science – Part 10: Acute Coronary Syndromes, I found a reminder that the ECG criteria for diagnosing ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) vary according to age and sex. From the original article in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology:

The threshold values of ST-segment elevation of 0.2 mV (2 mm) in some leads and 0.1 mV (1 mm) in others results from recognition that some elevation of the junction of the QRS complex and the ST segment (the J point) in most chest leads is normal. Recent studies have revealed that the threshold values are dependent on gender, age, and ECG lead ([8], [9], [10], [11] and [12]). In healthy individuals, the amplitude of the ST junction is generally highest in leads V2 and V3 and is greater in men than in women.
Recommendations

  1. For men 40 years of age and older, the threshold value for abnormal J-point elevation should be 0.2 mV (2 mm) in leads V2 and V3 and 0.1 mV (1 mm) in all other leads.
  2. For men less than 40 years of age, the threshold values for abnormal J-point elevation in leads V2 and V3 should be 0.25 mV (2.5 mm).
  3. For women, the threshold value for abnormal J-point elevation should be 0.15 mV (1.5 mm) in leads V2 and V3 and greater than 0.1 mV (1 mm) in all other leads.
  4. For men and women, the threshold for abnormal J-point elevation in V3R and V4R should be 0.05 mV (0.5 mm), except for males less than 30 years of age, for whom 0.1 mV (1 mm) is more appropriate.
  5. For men and women, the threshold value for abnormal J- point elevation in V7 through V9 should be 0.05 mV (0.5 mm).
  6. For men and women of all ages, the threshold value for abnormal J-point depression should be −0.05 mV (−0.5 mm) in leads V2 and V3 and −0.1 mV (−1 mm) in all other leads.

What does establishment of abnormal J-point mean for STEMI diagnosis? The AHA/ECC guidelines state the following:

ST-segment elevation… is characterized by ST-segment elevation in 2 or more contiguous leads and is classified as ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI). Threshold values for ST-segment elevation consistent with STEMI are:

  • J-point elevation 0.2 mV (2 mm) in leads V2 and V3 and 0.1 mV (1 mm) in all other leads (men ≥40 years old);
  • J-point elevation 0.25 mV (2.5 mm) in leads V2 and V3 and 0.1 mV (1 mm) in all other leads (men <40 years old);
  • J-point elevation 0.15 mV (1.5 mm) in leads V2 and V3 and 0.1 mV (1 mm) in all other leads (women).

So, in summary:

Older men – 2mm in V2/V3 and 1mm everywhere else
Younger men – 2.5 mm in V2/V3 and 1mm everywhere else
Women – 1.5 mm in V2/V3 and 1mm everywhere else

Shouldn’t be too difficult to remember.
Part 10: acute coronary syndromes: 2010 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care.
Circulation. 2010 Nov 2;122(18 Suppl 3):S787-817
AHA/ACCF/HRS recommendations for the standardization and interpretation of the electrocardiogram: part VI: acute ischemia/infarction: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Electrocardiography and Arrhythmias Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology; the American College of Cardiology Foundation; and the Heart Rhythm Society. Endorsed by the International Society for Computerized Electrocardiology.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009 Mar 17;53(11):1003-11

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU, Kids, Resus

Intravenous lipid emulsion as antidote

Leave a comment

Emergency physician intensivist Grant Cave and colleagues review the literature on intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) therapy for human poisoning in this month’s Emergency Medicine Australasia

Intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE) has been demonstrated to be effective in amelioration of cardiovascular and central nervous system sequelae of local-anaesthetic and non-local-anaesthetic drug toxicity in animal models. Sequestration of lipophilic toxins to an expanded plasma lipid phase is credited as the predominant beneficial mechanism of action of ILE. Systematic review of published human experience is however lacking. We determined to report a comprehensive literature search of all human reports of ILE application in drug poisoning. Forty-two cases of ILE use (19 local-anaesthetic, 23 non-local-anaesthetic) were identified, with anecdotal reports of successful resuscitation from cardiovascular collapse and central nervous system depression associated with ILE administration in lipophilic toxin overdose. Although significant heterogeneity was observed in both agents of intoxication, and reported outcomes; case report data suggest a possible benefit of ILE in potentially life-threatening cardio-toxicity from bupivacaine, mepivacaine, ropivacaine, haloperidol, tricyclic antidepressants, lipophilic beta blockers and calcium channel blockers. Further controlled study and systematic evaluation of human cases is required to define the clinical role of ILE in acute poisonings.

Review article: Intravenous lipid emulsion as antidote: A summary of published human experience.
Emerg Med Australas. 2011 Apr;23(2):123-41
An editorial by Guy Weinberg, the researcher who first demonstrated the effect of ILE on bupivacaine toxicity, has some interesting observations and recommendations:

  • Each of the first six case reports of lipid resuscitation from local anaesthetic systemic toxicity (LAST) were noted to have one or more of either underlying ischaemia, conduction defect or low cardiac output. For patients in these susceptible groups, reduce the dose of local anaesthetics used in nerve blocks
  • There is laboratory evidence that epinephrine (adrenaline) can impair lipid resuscitation. Weinberg believes that epinephrine should be used only in small doses, if at all, in treating LAST
  • In bupivacaine toxicity, use it early rather than later, as outcomes are likely to be better when intervention occurs before tissue perfusion has been compromised and too much pressor therapy has been used

Weinberg informs us that more examples of lipid resuscitation can be found at the educational website: http://www.lipidrescue.org/ and the registry site: http://www.lipidregistry.org/.
Intravenous lipid emulsion: Why wait to save a life?
Emerg Med Australas. 2011 Apr;23(2):113-5
In his editorial Weinberg refers to the review article by Jamaty et al, whose suggested regimen included 20% ILE 1.5mL/kg bolus then 0.25–0.5 mL/kg/min for 30–60 min.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of intravenous fat emulsion (IFE) in the management of poisoned patients.
METHODS: We performed a systematic review of the literature with no time or language restriction. The electronic databases were searched from their inception until June 1, 2009 (Medline, EMBASE, ISI web of science, Biological abstract, LILACS, ChemIndex, Toxnet, and Proquest). We also examined the references of identified articles and the gray literature. The target interventions eligible for inclusion were administration of any IFE before, during, or after poisoning in human or animals. All types of studies were reviewed. Eligibility for inclusion and study quality scores, based on criteria by Jadad and the STROBE statement, were evaluated by independent investigators. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes included neurologic, hemodynamic, and electrocardiographic variables, as well as adverse effects.
RESULTS: Of the 938 publications identified by the search strategies, 74 met the inclusion criteria. We identified 23 animal trials, 50 human, and 1 animal case reports. Overall, the quality of evidence was weak and significant heterogeneity prevented data pooling. Available data suggest some benefits of IFE in bupivacaine, verapamil, chlorpromazine, and some tricyclic antidepressants and beta-blockers toxicity. No trial assessed the safety of IFE in the treatment of acute poisoning.
CONCLUSION: The evidence for the efficacy of IFE in reducing mortality and improving hemodynamic, electrocardiographic, and neurological parameters in the poisoned patients is solely based on animal studies and human case reports. The safety of IFE has not been established.

Lipid emulsions in the treatment of acute poisoning: a systematic review of human and animal studies.
Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2010 Jan;48(1):1-27
The Guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland, also endorsed by the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists, outline the dose and indications for ILE in LAST. The full guideline can be accessed by clicking the image below:

Acute Med, All Updates, Resus

Triple marker panel for AMI

Leave a comment

A large Asian/Australasian study examined a 2hr triple-marker test in patients presenting with chest pain.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chest pain contribute substantially to emergency department attendances, lengthy hospital stay, and inpatient admissions. A reliable, reproducible, and fast process to identify patients presenting with chest pain who have a low short-term risk of a major adverse cardiac event is needed to facilitate early discharge. We aimed to prospectively validate the safety of a predefined 2-h accelerated diagnostic protocol (ADP) to assess patients presenting to the emergency department with chest pain symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome.
METHODS: This observational study was undertaken in 14 emergency departments in nine countries in the Asia-Pacific region, in patients aged 18 years and older with at least 5 min of chest pain. The ADP included use of a structured pre-test probability scoring method (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] score), electrocardiograph, and point-of-care biomarker panel of troponin, creatine kinase MB, and myoglobin. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events within 30 days after initial presentation (including initial hospital attendance). This trial is registered with the Australia-New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12609000283279.
FINDINGS: 3582 consecutive patients were recruited and completed 30-day follow-up. 421 (11.8%) patients had a major adverse cardiac event. The ADP classified 352 (9.8%) patients as low risk and potentially suitable for early discharge. A major adverse cardiac event occurred in three (0.9%) of these patients, giving the ADP a sensitivity of 99.3% (95% CI 97.9-99.8), a negative predictive value of 99.1% (97.3-99.8), and a specificity of 11.0% (10.0-12.2).
INTERPRETATION: This novel ADP identifies patients at very low risk of a short-term major adverse cardiac event who might be suitable for early discharge. Such an approach could be used to decrease the overall observation periods and admissions for chest pain. The components needed for the implementation of this strategy are widely available. The ADP has the potential to affect health-service delivery worldwide.

A 2-h diagnostic protocol to assess patients with chest pain symptoms in the Asia-Pacific region (ASPECT): a prospective observational validation study.
Lancet. 2011 Mar 26;377(9771):1077-84
Full text link available at time of writing
In an accompanying editorial, nicely entitled ‘Acute MI: triple-markers resurrected or Bayesian dice?’ Dr Rick Body notes that the point-of-care triple-marker test has a relatively low sensitivity, at just 82.9%, when used alone, and the sensitivity only increased to 99.3% in the current study because it was used in an already-selected low-risk population. He writes: “Most people will probably consider this net risk to be statistically acceptable. However, if properly informed, low-risk patients might feel differently about the relative merits of waiting for definitive six-hour laboratory-based troponin testing or going home after two hours on the basis of results from a test that correctly identifies serious coronary disease, when present, in just over eight of 10 occasions.”
Dr Body has a new blog at The Bodsblog where we’re likely to be informed other data relevant to emergency cardiology as they emerge.
Point-of-care panel assessment using a similar triple-marker test at presentation and 90 minutes was also examined in the RATPAC study, in which it increased successful discharge home and reduced median length of stay, but did not alter overall hospital bed use.

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU, Resus

LRAs for acute asthma?

Leave a comment

As far as I’m concerned the jury is still out here since this small study was terminated early, more patients in the montelukast group received magnesium and / or aminophylline, and it is unclear how the groups compared with regard to other other acute therapies such as beta-agonists and steroids.

BACKGROUND: Although leukotriene receptor antagonists have an established role in the management of patients with chronic asthma, their efficacy in an acute asthma exacerbation is not fully known.
METHODS: 87 adults with acute asthma requiring hospitalisation were randomly assigned to receive either montelukast 10 mg or placebo on admission and every evening thereafter for 4 weeks (when they were reviewed as outpatients). All patients were admitted under the care of a consultant chest physician and received full care for acute asthma according to the British Thoracic Society guidelines. The primary end point was the difference in peak expiratory flow (PEF) between active and placebo treatment the morning following admission.
RESULTS: Primary end point data were analysed for 73 patients. At study entry, patients who received montelukast (n=37) had a mean (±SD) PEF of 227.6 (±56.9) l/min (47.6% predicted) and those who received placebo (n=36) had a PEF of 240.3 (±99.8) l/min (49.6% predicted). The morning after admission, patients who received montelukast achieved a PEF of 389.6 (±109.7) l/min (81.4% predicted) compared with 332.3 (±124.9) l/min (69.8% predicted) for placebo (p=0.046). The mean difference between treatment groups was 57.4 l/min (95% CI of 1.15 to 113.6 l/min or 1.95-21.2% predicted).
CONCLUSION: In acute asthma exacerbations the additional administration of oral montelukast results in a significantly higher PEF the morning after admission than that achievable with current standard treatment.

Oral montelukast in acute asthma exacerbations: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Thorax. 2011 Jan;66(1):7-11

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU, Resus

Vasoactive drugs in cardiogenic shock

Leave a comment

I’m always on the look-out for evidence to guide vasoactive drug therapy, an area where much dogma is spouted by many who have not read the literature. Here’s a small (note: pilot) study comparing two strategies for cardiogenic shock. The higher heart rate and lactate with epinephrine (adrenaline) are consistent with the findings of the great CAT study; this is of interest, but not necessarily clinically significant nor practice changing.

OBJECTIVE: There is no study that has compared, in a randomized manner, which vasopressor is most suitable in optimizing both systemic and regional hemodynamics in cardiogenic shock patients. Hence, the present study was designed to compare epinephrine and norepinephrine-dobutamine in dopamine-resistant cardiogenic shock.
DESIGN: Open, randomized interventional human study.
SETTING: Medical intensive care unit in a university hospital.
PATIENTS: Thirty patients with a cardiac index of <2.2 L/min/m and a mean arterial pressure of <60 mm Hg resistant to combined dopamine-dobutamine treatment and signs of shock. Patients were not included in cases of cardiogenic shock secondary to acute ischemic events such as myocardial infarction. Noninclusion criteria also included immediate indication of mechanical assistance.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive an infusion of either norepinephrine-dobutamine or epinephrine titrated to obtain a mean arterial pressure of between 65 and 70 mm Hg with a stable or increased cardiac index.
MAIN RESULTS: Both regimens increased cardiac index and oxygen-derived parameters in a similar manner. Patients in the norepinephrine-dobutamine group demonstrated heart rates lower (p<.05) than those in the epinephrine group. Epinephrine infusion was associated with new arrhythmias in three patients. When compared to baseline values, after 6 hrs, epinephrine infusion was associated with an increase in lactate level (p<.01), whereas this level decreased in the norepinephrine-dobutamine group. Tonometered PCO2 gap, a surrogate for splanchnic perfusion adequacy, increased in the epinephrine-treated group (p<.01) while decreasing in the norepinephrine group (p<.01). Diuresis increased in both groups but significantly more so in the norepinephrine-dobutamine group, whereas plasma creatinine decreased in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: When considering global hemodynamic effects, epinephrine is as effective as norepinephrine-dobutamine. Nevertheless, epinephrine is associated with a transient lactic acidosis, higher heart rate and arrhythmia, and inadequate gastric mucosa perfusion. Thus, the combination norepinephrine-dobutamine appears to be a more reliable and safer strategy.

Comparison of norepinephrine-dobutamine to epinephrine for hemodynamics, lactate metabolism, and organ function variables in cardiogenic shock. A prospective, randomized pilot study
Crit Care Med. 2011 Mar;39(3):450-5

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU, Resus

Thrombolysis for PE after limb surgery

Leave a comment

A patient develops shock and dyspnoea on the orthopaedic ward after a total knee replacement and massive pulmonary embolism is confirmed radiologically. Would you give a fibrinolytic or is it contraindicated? Harry Wright and colleagues did, but before giving 50 mg of intravenous rtPA they applied a tourniquet (Cryocuff) to the limb to limit the proportion of the systemic thrombolytic agent that would reach the site of the surgery. The tourniquet was inflated just before the infusion and was left on for one hour. There was some oozing of blood from the postoperative wound, which settled with bandage compression. The authors state that the inflation time of one hour was sufficient for the thrombolytic agent to be largely eliminated from the circulation, since alteplase has a plasma half-life of less than five minutes, although some plasminogen activator activity does persist for up to four hours.

The patient was well at three month follow up. They suggest:

Given the success in this case, we believe that major limb surgery no longer represents a contraindication to thrombolysis.

Thrombolysis for postoperative pulmonary embolism: limiting the risk of haemorrhage
Thorax. 2011 May;66(5):452

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU, Resus

Saving mothers' lives

Leave a comment

The eighth Report of the Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in the UK investigates the deaths of 261 women who died in the triennium 2006–08, from causes directly or indirectly related to pregnancy.
Direct deaths (from medical conditions that can only be the result of pregnancy) significantly decreased from 6.24 per 100 000 maternities in the last triennium to 4.67 per 100 000 maternities in this triennium (P = 0.02). This equates to 25 fewer direct maternal deaths over the triennium, and this decline is predominantly the result of reductions in deaths from thromboembolism, and to a lesser extent, haemorrhage. The case fatality rate for ectopic pregnancy has almost halved from an estimated rate of 31.2 per 100 000 estimated ectopic pregnancies in 2003–05 to 16.9 in this triennium.
Although Direct maternal deaths have decreased overall there has been a dramatic increase in deaths related to genital tract sepsis, particularly from community-acquired Group A streptococcal disease. The overall rate has increased from 0.85 deaths per 100 000 maternities in 2003–05 to 1.13 deaths in this triennium. Sepsis is now the commonest cause of Direct maternal deaths in the UK and this has prompted a Clinical Briefing from the Centre for Maternal and Child Enquiries (CMACE) alerting health professionals to the risks.
Indirect maternal death rates have remained largely unchanged since the last report. Cardiac disease remains the most common cause of Indirect maternal death: many of these women also had lifestyle-related risk factors for cardiac disease: obesity, smoking and increased maternal age.
The review revealed many of the deaths to be associated with substandard care, some of the challenges being:

  1. Improving clinical knowledge and skills.
  2. Identifying very sick women.
  3. Improving the quality of serious incident/serious untoward incident (SUI) reports.
  4. Improving senior support.
  5. Better management of higher risk women.
  6. Pre-pregnancy counselling.
  7. Better referrals.
  8. Improving communication or communication skills, including: poor or non-existent teamworking; inappropriate or overly short telephone consultations; poor sharing of information between health professionals, particularly the maternity care team and GPs; poor interpersonal skills.

ABSTRACT In the triennium 2006-2008, 261 women in the UK died directly or indirectly related to pregnancy. The overall maternal mortality rate was 11.39 per 100,000 maternities. Direct deaths decreased from 6.24 per 100,000 maternities in 2003-2005 to 4.67 per 100,000 maternities in 2006–2008 (p = 0.02). This decline is predominantly due to the reduction in deaths from thromboembolism and, to a lesser extent, haemorrhage. For the first time there has been a reduction in the inequalities gap, with a significant decrease in maternal mortality rates among those living in the most deprived areas and those in the lowest socio-economic group. Despite a decline in the overall UK maternal mortality rate, there has been an increase in deaths related to genital tract sepsis, particularly from community acquired Group A streptococcal disease. The mortality rate related to sepsis increased from 0.85 deaths per 100,000 maternities in 2003-2005 to 1.13 deaths in 2006-2008, and sepsis is now the most common cause of Direct maternal death. Cardiac disease is the most common cause of Indirect death; the Indirect maternal mortality rate has not changed significantly since 2003-2005. This Confidential Enquiry identified substandard care in 70% of Direct deaths and 55% of Indirect deaths. Many of the identified avoidable factors remain the same as those identified in previous Enquiries. Recommendations for improving care have been developed and are highlighted in this report. Implementing the Top ten recommendations should be prioritised in order to ensure the overall UK maternal mortality rate continues to decline.

Saving Mothers’ Lives: Reviewing maternal deaths to make motherhood safer: 2006-2008. The Eighth Report of the Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in the United Kingdom
BJOG. 2011 Mar;118 Suppl 1:1-203 (Full text available from CMACE site)

Acute Med, All Updates, ICU

Extracorporeal liver support in acute liver failure

Leave a comment

Critically ill patients may receive cardiovascular, respiratory, and renal support, but systems that perform some of the functions of the liver are less routinely used. Extracorporeal liver support can be provided by artificial systems or bioartificial systems:

  • Artificial liver support systems aim to replace the detoxification functions of the liver, based on albumin dialysis, and consist of membrane separation associated with columns or suspensions of sorbents, including charcoal and anion or cation exchange resins.
  • Bioartificial systems incorporate either human hepatoblastoma cells or porcine hepatocytes into bioreactors that are intended to perform both liver detoxification and synthetic functions. A porous barrier between the patient’s blood or plasma isolates cells from immunoglobulins and leucocytes, avoiding immune rejection. Smaller particles such as toxins, metabolites and synthesized proteins are free to cross the barrier.

Three artificial liver support system types and two bioartificial liver systems have undergone randomised controlled trials. A meta-analysis examined the effect of extracorporeal liver support on mortality

Molecular Adsorbent Recirculating System

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal liver support (ELS) systems offer the potential to prolong survival in acute and acute-on-chronic liver failure. However, the literature has been unclear on their specific role and influence on mortality. This meta-analysis aimed to test the hypothesis that ELS improves survival in acute and acute-on-chronic liver failure.
METHODS: Clinical trials citing MeSH terms ‘liver failure’ and ‘liver, artificial’ were identified by searching MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane registry of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) between January 1995 and January 2010. Only RCTs comparing ELS with standard medical therapy in acute or acute-on-chronic liver failure were included. A predefined data collection pro forma was used and study quality assessed according to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) criteria. Risk ratio was used as the effect size measure according to a random-effects model.
RESULTS: The search strategy revealed 74 clinical studies including 17 RCTs, five case-control studies and 52 cohort studies. Eight RCTs were suitable for inclusion, three addressing acute liver failure (198 participants) and five acute-on-chronic liver failure (157 participants). The mean CONSORT score was 14 (range 11-20). Overall ELS therapy significantly improved survival in acute liver failure (risk ratio 0·70; P = 0·05). The number needed to treat to prevent one death in acute liver failure was eight. No significant survival benefit was demonstrated in acute-on-chronic liver failure (risk ratio 0·87; P = 0·37).
CONCLUSION: ELS systems appear to improve survival in acute liver failure. There is, however, no evidence that they improve survival in acute-on-chronic liver failure.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of survival following extracorporeal liver support
Br J Surg. 2011 May;98(5):623-31