No abstract

Sofosbuvir/Simeprevir combination is an effective and well tolerated regimen for patients with chronic HCV genotype IV.

DAAs are safe and effective in genotype 4 chronic HCV patients. It improves liver necro-inflammatory markers in cirrhotics and non-cirrhotics. Cirrhotic patients require careful observation being more vulnerable for treatment related complications.

Background and Aims This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of sofosbuvir (SOF)‐based regimens in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment; a subject which has been questioned by many investigators with conflicting results. Methods This is a real‐life multicentre retrospective cohort study on 4944 chronic Hepatitis C virus (HCV) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) (eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) who received SOF‐based therapy in specialized treatment centres affiliated to the National Committee for the Control of Viral Hepatitis in Egypt. The efficacy and safety of SOF‐based regimens was assessed. Results Week 12 virological response rates were 97.5%, 96.7%, 85.7% and 80% in the total cohort, patients with eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2, patients with associated hepatic decompensation and patients on dialysis respectively. Various treatment regimens did not statistically affect the response rates. Treatment experience, cirrhosis and diabetes were predictors of treatment failure on multivariate analysis. Serious adverse events occurred in 0.1% of cases. Forty patients (0.8%) discontinued treatment. Conclusion Sofosbuvir‐based regimens are effective and safe for treating patients with chronic HCV and moderate to severe CKD, and in those with associated hepatic decompensation.

Background and aims Albumin infusion reduces the incidence of postparacentesis circulatory dysfunction among patients with cirrhosis and tense ascites compared with no treatment. Less costly treatment alternatives such as vasoconstrictors have been investigated, but the results are controversial. Midodrine, an oral α1-adrenergic agonist, increases effective circulating blood volume and renal perfusion by increasing systemic and splanchnic blood pressure. Our aim is to assess whether or not morbidity in terms of renal dysfunction, hyponatremia, systemic, or portal hemodynamics derangement or mortality differed in patients receiving albumin versus midodrine. Patients and methods Seventy-five patients with cirrhosis and refractory ascites were randomized to receive albumin infusion, oral midodrine for 2 days, or oral midodrine for 30 days after therapeutic large volume paracentesis (LVP). The primary endpoints were development of renal impairment or hyponatremia, change in systemic and portal hemodynamics, cost, and mortality in the short-term and long-term follow-up. Results No significant difference was found between groups in the development of renal impairment, hyponatremia, or mortality 6 and 30 days after LVP. A significant increase in 24-h urine sodium excretion was noted in the midodrine 30-day group. Renal perfusion improved significantly with the midodrine intake for 30 days only. The cost of midodrine therapy was significantly lower than albumin. Conclusion Midodrine is as effective as albumin in reducing morbidity and mortality among patients with refractory ascites undergoing LVP at a significantly lower cost. Long-duration midodrine intake can be more useful than shorter duration intake in terms of improvement of renal perfusion and sodium excretion.