Search

Hyponatremia is the most common electrolyte abnormality in patients with decompensated cirrhosis on Liver Transplantation (LT) waiting list. Most of these patients have dilutional or hypervolemic hyponatremia secondary to splanchnic vasodilatation. Excessive secretion of the antidiuretic hormone also plays an important role. Hypervolemic hyponatremia is commonly associated with refractory ascites, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatic encephalopathy. Although uncommon, the use of diuretics and laxatives can cause hypovolemic hyponatremia that is characterized by the striking absence of ascites or pedal edema. Clinical features are often nonspecific and depend on the acuity of onset rather than the absolute value of serum sodium. Symptoms may be subtle, including nausea, lethargy, weakness, or anorexia. However, rarely patients may present with confusion, seizures, psychosis, or coma. Treatment includes discontinuation of diuretics, beta-blockers, and albumin infusion. Hypertonic saline (3%) infusion may be used in patients with very low serum sodium (

The association between alcohol and liver disease, including alcoholic hepatitis, cirrhosis, acute-on-chronic liver failure, and hepatocellular carcinoma, has been well described, but the same cannot be said for the association between smoking, water pipe or tobacco chewing. A review of cumulative evidence suggests that smoking is independently a risk factor for liver fibrosis and contributes to carcinogenesis in HCC. Smoking-related fibrosis has been reported in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, primary biliary cholangitis, alcoholic liver disease and chronic viral hepatitis. Heavy smoking leads to systemic inflammation, oxidative stress, insulin resistance, and results in tissue hypoxia, as well as free radical damage. Other than damaging the liver, patients also suffer from the systemic effects of the 4000 chemicals associated with tobacco, which include nitrosamines, aromatic hydrocarbons, nicotine, nornicotine, and other alkaloids. These include respiratory ailments, cancer of the lungs, oral cavity, esophagus, pancreas and colon, atherosclerotic vascular disease, and stroke.

As liver is one of the primary organs involved in glucose homeostasis, it is not surprising that patients with liver dysfunction in chronic liver disease usually develop impaired glucose tolerance and subsequently overt diabetes later in their natural course. Diabetes that develops after the onset of cirrhosis of liver is usually referred to as hepatogenous diabetes (HD). It is an underrecognized and a hallmark endocrinological event in chronic liver disease. HD is associated with a higher risk of developing hepatic decompensations, such as ascites, variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, renal dysfunction, refractory ascites, and hepatocellular carcinoma along with reduced survival rates than normoglycemic patients with cirrhosis of liver. It is quite different from type 2 diabetes mellitus with the absence of classical risk factors, dissimilar laboratory profiles, and decreased incidence of microvascular complications. Furthermore, the management of patients with HD is challenging because of altered pharmacokinetics of most antidiabetic drugs and increased risk of hypoglycemia and other adverse effects. Hence, a clear understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical implications, laboratory diagnosis, and management of HD is essential for both hepatologists as well as endocrinologists, which is narrated briefly in this review.

Hypereosinophilia is defined as an absolute eosinophil count of ≥1.5 × 109/L, and its presence with involvement of at least one organ system defines the hypereosinophilic syndrome. It may occur with parasitic infestation, connective tissue disorder or rarely in clonal disorders such as eosinophilic leucaemia. Organ systems that may be involved include the cardiovascular, central nervous, respiratory and gastrointestinal systems. In the latter, a wide spectrum of clinical presentation may be seen from trivial, to debilitating or rarely fatal. We report an elderly male with a history of bronchial asthma, obstructive sleep apnoea and food allergy who presented with chronic abdominal pain and weight loss. Abdominal examination and routine evaluation were essentially normal other than a peripheral hyper-eosinophilia. We witnessed a brisk and lasting response to an elimination diet and corticosteroids.

Sickle hepatopathy is an umbrella term describing various pattern of liver injury seen in patients with sickle cell disease. The disease is not uncommon in India; in terms of prevalence, India is second only to Sub-Saharan Africa where sickle cell disease is most prevalent. Hepatic involvement in sickle cell disease is not uncommon. Liver disease may result from viral hepatitis and iron overload due to multiple transfusions of blood products or due to disease activity causing varying changes in vasculature. The clinical spectrum of disease ranges from ischemic injury due to sickling of red blood cells in hepatic sinusoids, pigment gall stones, and acute/chronic sequestration syndromes. The sequestration syndromes are usually episodic and self-limiting requiring conservative management such as antibiotics and intravenous fluids or packed red cell transfusions. However, rarely these episodes may present with coagulopathy and encephalopathy like acute liver failure, which are life-threatening, requiring exchange transfusions or even liver transplantation. However, evidence for their benefits, optimal indications, and threshold to start exchange transfusion is limited. Similarly, there is paucity of the literature regarding the end point of exchange transfusion in this scenario. Liver transplantation may also be beneficial in end-stage liver disease. Hydroxyurea, the antitumor agent, which is popularly used to prevent life-threatening complications such as acute chest syndrome or stroke in these patients, has been used only sparingly in hepatic sequestrations. The purpose of this review is to provide insights into epidemiology of sickle cell disease in India and pathogenesis and classification of hepatobiliary involvement in sickle cell disease. Finally, various management options including exchange transfusion, liver transplantation, and hydroxyurea in hepatic sequestration syndromes will be discussed in brief.

Acute liver failure (ALF) is not an uncommon complication of a common disease such as acute hepatitis. Viral hepatitis followed by antituberculosis drug–induced hepatotoxicity are the commonest causes of ALF in India. Clinically, such patients present with appearance of jaundice, encephalopathy, and coagulopathy. Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and cerebral edema are central and most important clinical event in the course of ALF, followed by superadded infections, and determine the outcome in these patients. The pathogenesis of encephalopathy and cerebral edema in ALF is unique and multifactorial. Ammonia plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis, and several therapies aim to correct this abnormality. The role of newer ammonia-lowering agents is still evolving. These patients are best managed at a tertiary care hospital with facility for liver transplantation (LT). Aggressive intensive medical management has been documented to salvage a substantial proportion of patients. In those with poor prognostic factors, LT is the only effective therapy that has been shown to improve survival. However, recognizing suitable patients with poor prognosis has remained a challenge. Close monitoring, early identification and treatment of complications, and couseling for transplant form the first-line approach to manage such patients. Recent research shows that use of dynamic prognostic models is better for selecting patients undergoing liver transplantation and timely transplant can save life of patients with ALF with poor prognostic factors.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the major causes of morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenditure in patients with chronic liver disease in India. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) had published its first guidelines on diagnosis and management of HCC (The Puri Recommendations) in 2014, and these guidelines were very well received by the healthcare community involved in diagnosis and management of HCC in India and neighboring countries. However, since 2014, many new developments have taken place in the field of HCC diagnosis and management, hence INASL endeavored to update its 2014 consensus guidelines. A new Task Force on HCC was constituted that reviewed the previous guidelines as well as the recent developments in various aspects of HCC that needed to be incorporated in the new guidelines. A 2-day round table discussion was held on 5th and 6th May 2018 at Puri, Odisha, to discuss, debate, and finalize the revised consensus statements. Each statement of the guideline was graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation system with minor modifications. We present here the 2019 Update of INASL Consensus on Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in India: The Puri-2 Recommendations.

Acute liver failure (ALF) is not an uncommon complication of a common disease such as acute hepatitis. Viral hepatitis followed by antituberculosis drug-induced hepatotoxicity are the commonest causes of ALF in India. Clinically, such patients present with appearance of jaundice, encephalopathy, and coagulopathy. Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and cerebral edema are central and most important clinical event in the course of ALF, followed by superadded infections, and determine the outcome in these patients. The pathogenesis of encephalopathy and cerebral edema in ALF is unique and multifactorial. Ammonia plays a crucial role in the pathogenesis, and several therapies aim to correct this abnormality. The role of newer ammonia-lowering agents is still evolving. These patients are best managed at a tertiary care hospital with facility for liver transplantation (LT). Aggressive intensive medical management has been documented to salvage a substantial proportion of patients. In those with poor prognostic factors, LT is the only effective therapy that has been shown to improve survival. However, recognizing suitable patients with poor prognosis has remained a challenge. Close monitoring, early identification and treatment of complications, and couseling for transplant form the first-line approach to manage such patients. Recent research shows that use of dynamic prognostic models is better for selecting patients undergoing liver transplantation and timely transplant can save life of patients with ALF with poor prognostic factors.

NAFLD is hepatic pandemic of the twenty rst century, being leading cause of chronic hepatic disease in western world. We did a cross sectional study to nd out prevalence of NAFLD among prospective healthy liver donors at a tertiary care hospital at New Delhi, India over a period from June 2014 to March 2016. 124 apparently healthy prospective liver donors were selected. Exclusion criteria were set to exclude all those who had signicant history of alcohol intake (dened as greater than 30g/day for men and greater than 20g/day for women over last two years), Hepatitis B or C infection, severe surgical weight loss or emaciation, Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Celiac disease, history of drug intake known to cause hepatic steatosis. Out of 124 prospective liver donors included in this study, 29 (23%) donors were found to have fatty liver on USG abdomen; 38 (31%) donors had fatty liver on unenhanced CTof the abdomen (LAI of ≤ 5 HU); 61 (49%) donors had fatty liver on magnetic resonance.

Gallstones are more common in patients with cirrhosis of the liver, and the incidence increases with severity of liver disease. Pigment stones are the most frequent type of gallstones (GSs) in cirrhotics, and majority remain asymptomatic. Hepatitis C virus infection and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease are the underlying etiologies of liver diseases that most often associated with GSs. Multiple altered mechanisms in cirrhosis such as chronic hemolysis due to hypersplenism, reduced bile acid synthesis and transport, decreased cholesterol secretion, decreased apolipoprotein A-I and A-II secretion, gallbladder hypo-motility, autonomic dysfunction, and portal hypertension collectively lead to increased risk of lithogenesis. Asymptomatic GSs should be followed up closely and offered laparoscopic cholecystectomy once symptomatic in Child-Pugh class A and B patients. The model for the end-stage liver disease score is the best predictor of the outcome after cholecystectomy. In patients of Child-Pugh class C, conservative or minimally invasive approaches should be used to treat complications of GSs.

BACKGROUND: Muscle cramps are witnessed in 22–88% of patients with cirrhosis of liver and frequently lead to sleep disturbance with an appalling impact on quality of life. Despite such a high prevalence, there is lack of evidence-based management protocol due to scarcity of trials on treatment options in the literature. This study aimed to review systematically the available therapeutic options for muscle cramps in patients with cirrhosis of liver. METHODS: A systematic review of the relevant databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science) to identify treatments for muscle cramps in patients with hepatic cirrhosis was performed. Studies meeting the selection criteria were reviewed and assessed for risk of bias and analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-four publications were identified as eligible for inclusion in this systematic review. Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 17 prospective studies were included. Taurine, methocarbamol, baclofen, and orphenadrine are relatively safer and effective treatment option for muscle cramps in cirrhosis on the basis of recently conducted RCTs. Moreover, l-carnitine, branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs), pregabalin, zinc, and vitamin D are also safe and showed beneficial effects on muscle cramps. However, studies on vitamin E revealed contradictory results. CONCLUSION: Taurine, BCAAs, orphenadrine, and baclofen are safe and well-tolerated treatment options for muscle cramps in cirrhosis. However, well-designed randomized controlled clinical trials are the need of the hour to determine the most suitable treatment options for skeletal muscle cramps in patients with cirrhosis of liver.

Liver diseases occurring during pregnancy can be serious and can progress rapidly, affecting outcomes for both the mother and fetus. They are a common cause of concern to an obstetrician and an important reason for referral to a hepatologist, gastroenterologist, or physician. Liver diseases during pregnancy can be divided into disorders unique to pregnancy, those coincidental with pregnancy, and preexisting liver diseases exacerbated by pregnancy. A rapid differential diagnosis between liver diseases related or unrelated to pregnancy is required so that specialist and urgent management of these conditions can be carried out. Specific Indian guidelines for the management of these patients are lacking. The Indian National Association for the Study of the Liver (INASL) in association with the Federation of Obstetric and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI) had set up a taskforce for development of consensus guidelines for management of patients with liver diseases during pregnancy, relevant to India. For development of these guidelines, a two-day roundtable meeting was held on 26-27 May 2018 in New Delhi, to discuss, debate, and finalize the consensus statements. Only those statements that were unanimously approved by most members of the taskforce were accepted. The primary objective of this review is to present the consensus statements approved jointly by the INASL and FOGSI for diagnosing and managing pregnant women with liver diseases. This article provides an overview of liver diseases occurring in pregnancy, an update on the key mechanisms involved in its pathogenesis, and the recommended treatment options.

Neurologic dysfunction characterised by Hepatic Encephalopathy (HE) and cerebral oedema are the most dramatic presentations of Acute Liver Failure (ALF) and signify poor outcome. Improved critical care and wider availability of emergency Liver Transplantation (LT) has improved survivability in ALF. In most cases absence of clinically overt encephalopathy after spontaneous recovery from ALF or after LT is thought to indicate complete neurologic recovery. Recent data suggests that neurologic recovery may not always be complete. Instances of persistent neurologic dysfunction as well as neuropsychiatric abnormalities are now being recognised and warrant active follow up of these patients. Although evidences irreversible neurologic damage is uncommon after ALF, neuropsychiatric disturbances are not uncommon. Complex pathogenesis is involved in neurocognitive disorders seen after many other conditions including LT that require critical care. Structural damage and persistent neurological abnormalities seen after ALF are more likely to be related to cerebral edema, raised intracranial tension and cerebral hypoxemia, while neurocognitive dysfunctions may be a part of a wider spectrum of disorders commonly seen among those who recover from any critical illness.

Malnutrition and sarcopenia are common in patients with chronic liver disease and are associated with increased risk of decompensation, infections, wait-list mortality and poorer outcomes after liver transplantation. Assessment of nutritional status and management of malnutrition are therefore essential to improve outcomes in patients with chronic liver disease. This consensus statement of the Indian National Association for Study of the Liver provides a comprehensive review of nutrition in chronic liver disease and gives recommendations for nutritional screening and treatment in specific clinical scenarios of malnutrition in cirrhosis in adults as well as children with chronic liver disease and metabolic disorders.

Renal dysfunction is very common among patients with chronic liver disease, and concomitant liver disease can occur among patients with chronic kidney disease. The spectrum of clinical presentation and underlying etiology is wide when concomitant kidney and liver disease occur in the same patient. Management of these patients with dual onslaught is challenging and requires a team approach of hepatologists and nephrologists. No recent guidelines exist on algorithmic approach toward diagnosis and management of these challenging patients. The Indian National Association for Study of Liver (INASL) in association with Indian Society of Nephrology (ISN) endeavored to develop joint guidelines on diagnosis and management of patients who have simultaneous liver and kidney disease. For generating these guidelines, an INASL-ISN Taskforce was constituted, which had members from both the societies. The taskforce first identified contentious issues on various aspects of simultaneous liver and kidney diseases, which were allotted to individual members of the taskforce who reviewed them in detail. A round-table meeting of the Taskforce was held on 20–21 October 2018 at New Delhi to discuss, debate, and finalize the consensus statements. The evidence and recommendations in these guidelines have been graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system with minor modifications. The strength of recommendations (strong and weak) thus reflects the quality (grade) of underlying evidence (I, II, III). We present here the INASL-ISN Joint Position Statements on Management of Patients with Simultaneous Liver and Kidney Disease.

The spectrum of microorganisms causing splenic abscess is large, and commonly involved organisms include Enterobacteriaceae, gram-positive cocci and anaerobes. Group B Streptococcus (GBS) commonly causes infection in newborns and pregnant women, but there is increasing incidence of GBS causing invasive infection among nonpregnant adults, particularly among diabetics. Common presentations of GBS infection in adults include bacteremia, soft-tissue and skin infection, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, meningitis and endocarditis. We report a case of splenic abscess due to Streptococcus agalactiae infection without endocarditis in a diabetic patient.

Gossypiboma refers to a retained surgical sponge that can occur after any type of surgery. Though it is a rare complication of surgery, the retention of surgical sponges still occurs. We report a case of a 70-year-old woman who presented with recurrent upper abdominal pain and fever. She had a prior history of cholecystectomy and choledochoduodenostomy. Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography showed a filling defect in common bile duct. However, during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and common bile duct clearance, clumps of woven fibres were removed suggestive of gossypiboma.

As the cirrhosis progresses, development of complication like ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, variceal bleeding, kidney dysfunction, and hepatocellular carcinoma signify increasing risk of short term mortality. Malnutrition and muscle wasting (sarcopenia) is yet other complications that negatively impact survival, quality of life, and response to stressors, such as infection and surgery in patients with cirrhosis. Conventionally, these are not routinely looked for, because nutritional assessment can be a difficult especially if there is associated fluid retention and/or obesity. Patients with cirrhosis may have a combination of loss of skeletal muscle and gain of adipose tissue, culminating in the condition of "sarcopenic obesity." Sarcopenia in cirrhotic patients has been associated with increased mortality, sepsis complications, hyperammonemia, overt hepatic encephalopathy, and increased length of stay after liver transplantation. Assessment of muscles with cross-sectional imaging studies has become an attractive index of nutritional status evaluation in cirrhosis, as sarcopenia, the major component of malnutrition, is primarily responsible for the adverse clinical consequences seen in patients with liver disease. Cirrhosis is a state of accelerated starvation, with increased gluconeogenesis that requires amino acid diversion from other metabolic functions. Protein homeostasis is disturbed in cirrhosis due to several factors such as hyperammonemia, hormonal, and cytokine abnormalities, physical inactivity and direct effects of ethanol and its metabolites. New approaches to manage sarcopenia are being evolved. Branched chain amino acid supplementation, Myostatin inhibitors, and mitochondrial protective agents are currently in various stages of evaluation in preclinical studies to prevent and reverse sarcopenia, in cirrhosis.

Background Recurrent hepatitis C virus (HCV) has been a serious problem after liver transplantation (LT). We report our experience of 24-week therapy with sofosbuvir (SOF) and ribavirin (RBV) in post-LT recurrent HCV in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) setting in South Asia. Methods Data from all patients treated for post-transplantation HCV recurrence in a single center were analyzed. Treatment regimen was 24 weeks of SOF 400 mg daily and RBV (starting at 800 mg daily, increased as tolerated). Sustained virological response (SVR) was assessed 12 weeks and 24 weeks after completion of treatment. Results 63 patients (median age 52 [range 30–69] years; 80% males) were treated. Most (76.2%) were treatment experienced and predominant HCV genotype was 3 (77.7%) followed by 1 (20.6%). Median transient elastography (Fibroscan) score was 7 (range 3–11) kPa and none of the patients had cirrhosis. SVR12 was achieved in 60 of 63 patients (95.2%) while SVR24 was noted in 59 (93.7%). SVR12 rates were as good in genotype-3 as in genotype-1. Older age, longer period after transplantation, higher Fibroscan value and higher need for erythropoietin were likely to be associated with relapse. Adverse effects were noted in 34 patients and weakness and fatigue were the commonest side effects. Significant drop in hemoglobin ( Conclusions SOF + RBV combination therapy for 24 weeks was safe and effective in treatment of for post-LT recurrent HCV in a single LT center and remains relevant due to its low cost and lack of drug interactions.

Treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) with newer directly acting antivirals (DAAs) and lead to sustained viral response (SVR) in majority of patients and SVR has been documented to be associated with reversal of liver cirrhosis. The improved SVR rates and safety profiles of DAAs have led to the treatment of patients with decompensated cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT). Several clinical trials of DAAs in decompensated HCV patients have recently demonstrated SVR rates above 80%, which have been associated with significant improvements, in the Child–Pugh–Turcotte scores/or model for end-stage liver disease scores in a proportion of patients. Moreover, it has been shown that HCV RNA becomes negative after 2–4 weeks of treatment, and those who are transplanted after becoming HCV RNA negative will be have very low the risk of HCV recurrence after transplantation. Some of the patients may have reached the “point of no return” and may proceed to worsening of decomposition over time. To avoid the risk of worsening, there is an additional option of treating these patients after LT should they develop recurrent HCV infection. Currently there are no guidelines as to select patients who would benefit from treatment prior to LT as opposed to those who will be better off being treated after the transplant surgery. The article discusses a possible approach for such selection.

India contributes significantly to the global burden of HCV. While the nucleoside NS5B inhibitor sofosbuvir became available in the Indian market in March 2015, the other directly acting agents (DAAs), Ledipasvir and Daclatasvir, have only recently become available in the India. The introduction of these DAA in India at a relatively affordable price has led to great optimism about prospects of cure for these patients as not only will they provide higher efficacy, but combination DAAs as all-oral regimen will result in lower side effects than were seen with pegylated interferon alfa and ribavirin therapy. Availability of these newer DAAs has necessitated revision of INASL guidelines for the treatment of HCV published in 2015. Current considerations for the treatment of HCV in India include the poorer response of genotype 3, nonavailability of many of the DAAs recommended by other guidelines and the cost of therapy. The availability of combination DAA therapy has simplified therapy of HCV with decreased reliance of evaluation for monitoring viral kinetics or drug related side effects.

Coffee is the most popular beverage in the world. Consumption of coffee has been shown to benefit health in general, and liver health in particular. This article reviews the effects of coffee intake on development and progression of liver disease due to various causes. We also describe the putative mechanisms by which coffee exerts the protective effect. The clinical evidence of benefit of coffee consumption in Hepatitis B and C, as well as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and alcoholic liver disease, has also been presented. Coffee consumption is associated with improvement in liver enzymes (ALT, AST, and GGTP), especially in individuals with risk for liver disease. Coffee intake more than 2 cups per day in patients with preexisting liver disease has been shown to be associated with lower incidence of fibrosis and cirrhosis, lower hepatocellular carcinoma rates, as well as decreased mortality.

PubMed: 29599078, 2-s2.0-85044540918, Background: The 69th World Health Assembly approved the Global Health Sector Strategy to eliminate viral hepatitis by 2030. Although no virological cure exists for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, existing therapies to control viral replication and prophylaxis to minimise mother-to-child transmission make elimination of HBV feasible. We aimed to estimate the national, regional, and global prevalence of HBsAg in the general population and in the population aged 5 years in 2016, as well as coverage of prophylaxis, diagnosis, and treatment. Methods: In this modelling study, we used a Delphi process that included a literature review in PubMed and Embase, followed by interviews with experts, to quantify the historical epidemiology of HBV infection. We then used a dynamic HBV transmission and progression model to estimate the country-level and regional-level prevalence of HBsAg in 2016 and the effect of prophylaxis and treatment on disease burden. Findings: We developed models for 120 countries, 78 of which were populated with data approved by experts. Using these models, we estimated that the global prevalence of HBsAg in 2016 was 3·9% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·4–4·6), corresponding to 291 992 000 (251 513 000–341 114 000) infections. Of these infections, around 29 million (10%) were diagnosed, and only 4·8 million (5%) of 94 million individuals eligible for treatment actually received antiviral therapy. Around 1·8 (1·6–2·2) million infections were in children aged 5 years, with a prevalence of 1·4% (1·2–1·6). We estimated that 87% of infants had received the three-dose HBV vaccination in the first year of life, 46% had received timely birth-dose vaccination, and 13% had received hepatitis B immunoglobulin along with the full vaccination regimen. Less than 1% of mothers with a high viral load had received antiviral therapy to reduce mother-to-child transmission. Interpretation: Our estimate of HBV prevalence in 2016 differs from previous studies, potentially because we took into account the effect of infant prophylaxis and early childhood vaccination, as well as changing prevalence over time. Although some regions are well on their way to meeting prophylaxis and prevalence targets, all regions must substantially scale-up access to diagnosis and treatment to meet the global targets. Funding: John C Martin Foundation. © 2018 Elsevier Ltd, H28-kansei-ippan-001 National Academy of Sciences, NAS Novartis Roche World Health Organization, WHO Gilead Sciences Alnylam Pharmaceuticals AbbVie Meso Scale Diagnostics, MSD British Microcirculation Society, BMS Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, JSPS: 17H03589 Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, MHLW Vetenskapsrådet, VR Siemens Universiteit Antwerpen OLL-683801, DR-S, IGa, SB, SMB, CE, KM, HMN, KP, KR-S, SR, JDS, and HR report grants from John C Martin Foundation, during the conduct of the study, and grants from Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, WHO, National Academy of Sciences, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, and Boehringer Ingelheim, outside the submitted work. MHN reports grants and personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Gilead Sciences, and Janssen, and personal fees from Novartis, Anylam, and Dynavax, outside the submitted work. PVD acts as chief and principal investigator for vaccine trials done on behalf of the University of Antwerp, Belgium, for which the University obtains research grants from vaccine manufacturers; speaker's fees for presentations on vaccines are paid directly to an educational fund held by the University of Antwerp, and PVD receives no personal remuneration for this work. ACA reports personal fees from Mylan Pharmaceuticals, outside the submitted work. JEA reports fees paid to his hospital for participation on the advisory boards of Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, BMS, Janssen, and AbbVie, and grants from BMS, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), AbbVie, and ViiV Healthcare, outside the submitted work. TB reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from AbbVie and Gilead Sciences; grants and personal fees from BMS, Janssen, Roche, MSD, and Sequana Medical; and personal fees from Bayer, Vertex, Tibotec, Intercept, Sirtex, and Alexion, outside the submitted work. PB reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and MSD, outside the submitted work. MBr reports personal fees from BMS, Gilead Sciences, and Janssen, and grants from BMS, outside the submitted work. HLYC reports personal fees from Gilead Sciences, BMS, AbbVie, Roche, MedImmune, and Intellia, outside the submitted work. PBC reports grants from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and MSD, outside the submitted work. VC reports personal fees from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead Sciences, and MSD, and grants from BMS, outside the submitted work. MCor reports personal fees from AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Biogen Idec, Falk Foundation, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MSD, Roche Diagnostics, Roche Pharma, and Siemens, outside the submitted work. SD and PJ report personal fees and non-financial support from AbbVie and Gilead Sciences, and personal fees from MSD, outside the submitted work. MHE-S is an advisory board member for Perspectum Diagnostics, and reports grants and non-financial support from Gilead Sciences, and non-financial support from AbbVie and Quadri Pharma, outside the submitted work. RF reports grants, personal fees, and non-financial support from Roche and Gilead Sciences, and personal fees and non-financial support from BMS, outside the submitted work. GBG reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences, outside the submitted work. JG-S reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences, and personal fees from MSD, Abbvie, Janssen, and BMS, outside the submitted work. JGer reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MSD, BMS, and ViiV Healthcare, outside the submitted work. RG reports grants from New South Wales Ministry of Health and provided project advice regarding viral hepatitis treatment to Gilead Sciences, outside the submitted work. AHa reports unrestricted grants from AbbVie, MSD, Gilead Sciences, BMS, and Novartis, and non-financial support from Gilead Sciences, outside the submitted work; he was also on advisory boards for AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and BMS. CH reports personal fees from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, and MSD, outside the submitted work. JJ reports personal fees and non-financial support from Gilead Sciences and AbbVie, and personal fees from Roche and BMS, outside the submitted work. MK reports grants from Roche, Siemens, Hologic, and Boerhinger Ingleheim, outside the submitted work. JVL reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from Cepheid, outside the submitted work. MMan reports personal fees from Roche, BMS, GlaxoSmithKline, Aevi Genomic Medicine, ENYO Pharma, and CureVac, and grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and Novartis, outside the submitted work. SMau reports personal fees and non-financial support from Gilead Sciences and BMS, outside the submitted work. CM reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and BMS; personal fees from MSD; and grants from Roche, outside the submitted work. BM reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from AbbVie, MSD, BMS, Bayer, Intercept, and Sigma-Tau, during the conduct of the study. FN reports personal fees and non-financial support from Gilead Sciences, during the conduct of the study. AR reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead, and MSD, and personal fees form BMS, Celgene, Janssen, Intercept, and Lupin, outside the submitted work. HWR reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, ENYO Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MSD, PRA Health Sciences, Regulus, and Roche; personal fees from Alnylam and R-Pharm; and grants from Replicor, outside the submitted work. LRR reports grants from the Center for Clinical and Translational Science and the Swedish Research Council (Ghana), during the conduct of the study. LRR also reports grants from Gilead Sciences, BTG, Ariad, and Wako, outside the submitted work, and was a consultant and advisory board member for Wako, Medscape, Axis, OncLive, Bayer, Tavec, and Grail. SDR has served as an advisory board member and speaker for Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, and MSD. OS has served as a consultant and on advisory boards for MSD; received research grants from AbbVie, BMS, MSD, Boehringer Ingelheim, R-Pharm, and Hepatera; and served as a speaker for Abbott, AbbVie, BMS, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, MSD, and R-Pharm. JFS-A reports personal fees from AbbVie and grants from Gilead Sciences and Janssen, outside the submitted work. CSa reports personal fees from Gilead Sciences and BMS, outside the submitted work. PS reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, and BMS, and personal fees from Intercept, outside the submitted work. CSt has consulted with and served on advisory boards for Gilead Sciences, AbbVie, and MSD. VSy reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences, personal fees and non-financial support from AbbVie, and personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitted work. KT reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and BMS; personal fees from MSD and Alfa Wasserman; and grants from Janssen, outside the submitted work. AJvdM reports grants and personal fees from Gilead Sciences and personal fees from AbbVie, outside the submitted work. IW reports personal fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Marcyrl, Mylan, Onxio, and Pharco, outside the submitted work. NW reports personal fees paid to her department from AbbVie, BMS, Gilead Sciences, and MSD, outside the submitted work. VWW reports personal fees from Gilead Sciences, BMS, and MSD, outside the submitted work. M-FY was a speaker or advisory board member for AbbVie, BMS, Gilead Sciences, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Fujirebio, Biocartis, and MSD, outside the submitted work. SZ reports consultancy and lecture fees from AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, and MSD, and consultancy fees from Intercept, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., This study was funded by the John C Martin Foundation through the Polaris Observatory. We thank the Research on Hepatitis group (H28-kansei-ippan-001 and H25-kanen-ippan-010; led by JT), funded by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan, for their provision of country-level data for Japan, and Örebro County Council for providing ALF grants (OLL-683801) to A-SD, which allowed collection of country-level data for Sweden.

Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) reactivation in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids is emerging to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with current or prior exposure to HBV infection. These patients suffer a dual onslaught of illness: one from the primary disease for which they are receiving the culprit drug that led to HBV reactivation, and the other from HBV reactivation itself. The HBV reactivation not only leads to a compromised liver function, which may culminate into hepatic failure; it also adversely impacts the treatment outcome of the primary illness. Hence, identification of patients at risk of reactivation before starting these drugs, and starting treatment aimed at prevention of HBV reactivation is the best strategy of managing these patients. There are no Indian guidelines on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids for the treatment of rheumatologic conditions, malignancies, inflammatory bowel disease, dermatologic conditions, or solid-organ or bone marrow transplantation. The Indian National Association for Study of the Liver (INASL) had set up a taskforce on HBV in 2016, with a mandate to develop consensus guidelines for management of various aspects of HBV infection, relevant to India. In 2017 the taskforce had published the first INASL guidelines on management of HBV infection in India. In the present guidelines, which are in continuation with the previous guidelines, the issues on management of HBV infection in patients receiving chemotherapy, biologicals, immunosupressants, or corticosteroids are addressed.

Overall prevalence of HCV infection in India has been estimated to be approximately 1.3% in the general population. Recent introduction of sofosbuvir in India at a relatively affordable price has led to great optimism about prospects of cure for these patients. This drug is likely to form the backbone of current and future treatment regimes for HCV infection, displacing pegylated interferon. Availability of directly acting antiviral drugs (DAAs) has necessitated revision of INASL guidelines for the treatment of HCV published in 2014, as has happened across the world. Current considerations for the treatment of HCV in India include the poorer response of genotype 3, nonavailability of many of the DAAs recommended by other guidelines and the cost of therapy. Since only one DAA, sofosbuvir, is available in India, only two sofosbuvir-based regimes are possible: either dual drug therapy in combination with ribavirin alone for 6 months or triple drug therapy in combination with ribavirin and pegylated interferon for 3 months. The utility of these regimes in various situations has been discussed. Availability of a few other newer DAAs, expected in 2016, is expected to lead to more widespread use of these agents. Current guidance will be updated once newer DAAs, newer evidence with DAAs and ‘real-life experience’ with use of DAAs accumulate in India.

The irritable bowel syndrome is the commonest gastrointestinal disorder seen in practice but its exact prevalence in India is not known. This study was carried out to determine the prevalence of symptoms compatible with this diagnosis in general population. A cross sectional random sample survey was conducted in various strata of urban population in Wanoworie area of Pune. Survey utilized personal interviews based on a questionnaire. Symptoms were evaluated as per Manning criteria and the diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome was defined by Kruis diagnostic index. Of the 1010 subjects interviewed, 370 (37%) reported more than 6 episodes of abdominal pain in previous 6 months, with 333 reporting symptoms consistent with the the diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome. At least one of the Manning's symptoms was present in 307 out of 370 subjects (83%). The male female ratio was 5.3:1. Among males, 288 (35%) and among females 82 (53.2%) persons had at least some degree of abdominal discomfort. Other common symptoms were: excessive passage of wind (42.2%), irregular bowel habits (33%), excessive belching (30.8%), constipation (27.5) and feeling of incomplete evacuation(28.1%). About one third of the symptomatic subjects (134 or 36.2%) had seen a doctor or wanted to be seen by a specialist. Overall prevalence of the symptoms consistent with irritable bowel syndrome thus, is 33 per cent though only about a third of these may possibly consult a doctor. Follow up of all these patients for a mean duration of 8.3 months showed that no case of organic disease was picked up either by the scoring system or by the gastroenterologist. Symptoms consistent with the diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome are see in almost one third of the study population residing in Wanoworie area of Pune.

A combined experience of 37 cases of subacute hepatic failure encountered in five major gastroenterology centres over a period of ten years is discussed. Majority (65%) were males with average age of 38 years. Maximum (54%) were in 5th decade. Jaundice (100%), abdominal distention (38.7%), swelling feet (64%), fever (54%), abdominal pain (54%), exhaustion (78.3%) were the major presenting features. Jaundice and ascites were present in all cases. Pedal oedema (78.3%), hepatomegaly (54%), splenomegaly (32.4%) and encephalopathy (27%) were the other important clinical features. Hypoalbuminemia and prolonged prothrombin time were significant laboratory findings in addition to hyperbilirubinemia and elevated ALT and AST. Hbs Ag was detected in 46%. Major complications encountered were renal failure (48.7%), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (43.2%), other infections (43.2%), encephalopathy (43.2%) and upper gastrointestinal bleed (22%). 54% died during stay in hospital. To conclude subacute hepatic failure is potentially fatal condition.