Randomised clinical trial: palliative long-term abdominal drains vs large-volume paracentesis in refractory ascites due to cirrhosis
- PMID: 32478917
- DOI: 10.1111/apt.15802
Randomised clinical trial: palliative long-term abdominal drains vs large-volume paracentesis in refractory ascites due to cirrhosis
Abstract
Background: Palliative care remains suboptimal in end-stage liver disease.
Aim: To inform a definitive study, we assessed palliative long-term abdominal drains in end-stage liver disease to determine recruitment, attrition, safety/potential effectiveness, questionnaires/interview uptake/completion and make a preliminary cost comparison.
Methods: A 12-week feasibility nonblinded randomised controlled trial comparing large-volume paracentesis vs long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites due to end-stage liver disease with fortnightly home visits for clinical/questionnaire-based assessments. Study success criteria were attrition not >50%, <10% long-term abdominal drain removal due to complications, the long-term abdominal drain group to spend <50% ascites-related study time in hospital vs large-volume paracentesis group and 80% questionnaire/interview uptake/completion.
Results: Of 59 eligible patients, 36 (61%) were randomised, 17 to long-term abdominal drain and 19 to large-volume paracentesis. Following randomisation, median number (IQR) of hospital ascitic drains (long-term abdominal drain group vs large-volume paracentesis group) were 0 (0-1) vs 4 (3-7); week 12 serum albumin (g/L) and serum creatinine (μmol/L) were 29 (26.5-32.5) vs 30 (25-35) and 104.5 (81-115.5) vs 127 (63-158) respectively. Total attrition was 42% (long-term abdominal drain group 47%, large-volume paracentesis group 37%). Median (IQR) fortnightly community/hospital/social care ascites-related costs and percentage study time in hospital were lower in the long-term abdominal drain group, £329 (253-580) vs £843 (603-1060) and 0% (0-0.74) vs 2.75% (2.35-3.84) respectively. Self-limiting cellulitis/leakage occurred in 41% (7/17) in the long-term abdominal drain group vs 11% (2/19) in the large-volume paracentesis group; peritonitis incidence was 6% (1/17) vs 11% (2/19) respectively. Questionnaires/interview uptake/completion were ≥80%; interviews indicated that long-term abdominal drains could transform the care pathway.
Conclusions: The REDUCe study demonstrates feasibility with preliminary evidence of long-term abdominal drain acceptability/effectiveness/safety and reduction in health resource utilisation.
Trial registration: ISRCTN30697116, date assigned: 07/10/2015.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Comment in
-
Editorial: palliative long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites-a step in the right direction, but not the complete solution.Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Aug;52(4):721-722. doi: 10.1111/apt.15894. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020. PMID: 32886361 No abstract available.
-
Editorial: palliative long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites-a step in the right direction, but not the complete solution. Authors' reply.Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Aug;52(4):723-724. doi: 10.1111/apt.15928. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020. PMID: 32886369 No abstract available.
-
Letter: long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites-evolving concept of palliative care in decompensated cirrhosis.Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Oct;52(7):1266-1267. doi: 10.1111/apt.15944. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020. PMID: 33016534 No abstract available.
-
Letter: long-term abdominal drains in refractory ascites-evolving concept of palliative care in decompensated cirrhosis. Authors' reply.Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020 Oct;52(7):1268-1269. doi: 10.1111/apt.15983. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2020. PMID: 33016545 No abstract available.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Public Health England. The 2nd Atlas of variation in risk factors and healthcare for liver disease in England. September 2017. https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/profile/atlas-of-variation. Accessed August 14, 2019.
-
- Fleming KM, Aithal GP, Card TR, West J. The rate of decompensation and clinical progression of disease in people with cirrhosis: a cohort study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2010;32:1343-1350.
-
- EASL Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with decompensated cirrhosis. European Association for the Study of the Liver. J Hepatol. 2018;69:406-460.
-
- Guardiola J, Barillas C, Viol X, et al. External validation of a prognostic model for predicting survival of cirrhotic patients with refractory ascites. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2374-2378.
-
- Medici V, Rossaro L, Wegelin JA, et al. The utility of the model for end-stage liver disease score - a reliable guide for liver transplant candidacy and for select patients, simultaneous hospice referral. Liver Transpl. 2008;14:1100-1106.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical