ArticleGastroenterology & hepatology2025
Use of Terlipressin in Liver Transplant Candidates.
Article in Gastroenterology & hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of terlipressin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome type 1 (HRS-1) in patients with advanced cirrhosis wait-listed for liver transplant (LT) has been controversial. Successful treatment lowers patients' Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score and hence their LT priority. Terlipressin's potential ischemic side effects and risks for respiratory failure in susceptible patients lend support to directly proceed to LT. However, responders to terlipressin have better post-LT survival with lower incidences of post-LT chronic kidney disease and need for renal replacement therapy (RRT). Available data suggest that terlipressin responders have not all been impacted negatively. HRS-1 itself confers a greater negative effect on survival when compared with patients with the same MELD score but without HRS-1; therefore, various countries except the United States have strategies to preserve the wait-list position of terlipressin responders. The MELD lock strategy uses the patient's pre-terlipressin MELD score to maintain their wait-list position indefinitely; a modified MELD lock system requires re-evaluation of the patient's eligibility status every 3 months. Patients taking long-term terlipressin for recurrent HRS are treated as needing RRT in assessing their LT priority. The United States considers that more data are needed before devising its own system for managing wait-listed terlipressin responders. Current data suggest that treating and reversing HRS in wait-listed patients is the appropriate course of action. This article will review the pros and cons of using terlipressin in LT wait-listed patients with HRS and the various strategies practiced by different countries to ensure equitable access to LT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40894985PMC12397782What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.