Hepatorenal Syndrome: A Comprehensive Review

Dr Neeraj Manikath , claude.ai

Abstract

Hepatorenal syndrome (HRS) represents a critical intersection between hepatic and renal pathophysiology, characterized by functional renal failure in patients with advanced liver disease. Despite significant advances in understanding its pathogenesis and management, HRS remains associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This review provides an evidence-based approach to the diagnosis, classification, and management of HRS, with practical clinical pearls for the practicing internist and hepatologist. We explore the evolving diagnostic criteria, discuss the nuances of differential diagnosis, and provide a comprehensive framework for clinical decision-making in this challenging condition.

Introduction

Hepatorenal syndrome is a unique form of acute kidney injury (AKI) that occurs in patients with cirrhosis and ascites, or less commonly, in acute liver failure. First described systematically in the 1950s, HRS represents a functional renal impairment without significant histological kidney damage, characterized by marked renal vasoconstriction in the setting of systemic vasodilation. The syndrome carries a grave prognosis if untreated, with median survival historically measured in weeks to months. However, recent therapeutic advances, including vasoconstrictors combined with albumin and liver transplantation, have improved outcomes significantly.

The incidence of HRS in patients with cirrhosis and ascites is approximately 20% at one year and 40% at five years, making it a common complication encountered by internists and hepatologists. Understanding when to suspect HRS, how to differentiate it from other causes of renal dysfunction, and how to initiate appropriate treatment can significantly impact patient outcomes.

Pathophysiology: The Foundation for Clinical Recognition

The Hemodynamic Hypothesis

The current understanding of HRS pathophysiology centers on the peripheral arterial vasodilation hypothesis, which provides the conceptual framework for both diagnosis and treatment. In advanced cirrhosis, portal hypertension leads to splanchnic vasodilation mediated primarily by nitric oxide and other vasodilatory substances. This results in effective arterial underfilling despite an expanded plasma volume.

Clinical Pearl: The paradox of HRS is that patients are typically volume overloaded with ascites and edema, yet their kidneys respond as if they are profoundly volume depleted. This explains why simple fluid administration rarely improves renal function in established HRS.

The compensatory activation of vasoconstrictor systems—including the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), sympathetic nervous system, and non-osmotic release of vasopressin—initially maintains blood pressure and renal perfusion. However, as liver disease progresses, these compensatory mechanisms become overwhelmed. The kidneys, being particularly sensitive to these vasoconstrictor influences due to their unique vascular anatomy, experience progressive vasoconstriction leading to decreased glomerular filtration rate (GFR).

Precipitating Factors: When to Heighten Suspicion

Several clinical scenarios should trigger heightened suspicion for HRS development:

Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP): Approximately 30% of patients with SBP develop HRS despite appropriate antibiotic therapy. The inflammatory response and bacterial translocation exacerbate the hemodynamic derangements.
Large-volume paracentesis without albumin replacement: Removal of more than 5 liters without adequate colloid replacement can precipitate circulatory dysfunction and HRS.
Gastrointestinal bleeding: The combination of hypovolemia, bacterial translocation, and increased renal vasoconstrictor activation creates a perfect storm for HRS.
Aggressive diuresis: Overzealous diuretic therapy can tip the balance toward renal hypoperfusion.
Nephrotoxic medications: NSAIDs, aminoglycosides, and contrast agents should be avoided in patients with advanced cirrhosis.

Clinical Hack: In any patient with cirrhosis and ascites who develops AKI, immediately review all medications for potential nephrotoxins and identify any recent procedures or complications that might precipitate HRS.

When to Suspect HRS: The Clinical Context

High-Risk Patient Profile

Suspicion for HRS should be particularly high in patients presenting with:

Advanced cirrhosis (Child-Pugh B or C) with refractory ascites
Serum sodium <130 mEq/L (indicator of advanced circulatory dysfunction)
Mean arterial pressure <80 mmHg without vasopressor support
Absence of shock or recent nephrotoxin exposure
Rising creatinine despite cessation of diuretics and adequate volume assessment

Oyster: Hyponatremia in cirrhosis is not merely a marker of dilution—it reflects profound activation of vasopressin and represents one of the strongest predictors of HRS development. A falling sodium should prompt immediate evaluation of renal function and consideration of HRS risk.

The Diagnostic Approach: Beyond Basic Creatinine

The diagnosis of HRS requires a systematic approach that excludes other causes of renal dysfunction while establishing the characteristic features of HRS.

Step 1: Document AKI in Cirrhosis

The International Club of Ascites (ICA) criteria define AKI in cirrhosis as an increase in serum creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or a ≥50% increase from baseline within seven days. This definition, borrowed from the KDIGO criteria, recognizes that even modest increases in creatinine in cirrhotic patients represent significant renal dysfunction.

Clinical Pearl: Baseline creatinine in cirrhotic patients is often artificially low due to decreased muscle mass and decreased creatinine production. A "normal" creatinine of 0.8 mg/dL may actually represent a significant decrease in GFR. Always interpret creatinine in the context of muscle mass and prior trends.

Step 2: Exclude Structural Kidney Disease

This requires:

Urinalysis: In HRS, urinalysis typically shows minimal proteinuria (<500 mg/day), bland sediment, and a low sodium concentration (<10 mEq/L in classic descriptions, though many experts now accept <20 mEq/L). The presence of significant proteinuria, hematuria, or cellular casts suggests alternative diagnoses such as acute tubular necrosis (ATN) or glomerulonephritis.
Renal ultrasound: Normal-sized kidneys without hydronephrosis support HRS diagnosis. Small kidneys suggest chronic kidney disease, while findings of obstruction or other structural abnormalities point to alternative diagnoses.

Hack: Calculate the fractional excretion of sodium (FENa) carefully. While FENa <1% was historically considered characteristic of HRS, patients on diuretics will have falsely elevated FENa. In such cases, consider the fractional excretion of urea (FEUrea <35%) as a more reliable marker of prerenal physiology. However, remember that FENa and FEUrea have limited discriminatory value in advanced cirrhosis and should not be used in isolation.

Step 3: Exclude Hypovolemia

This is perhaps the most challenging aspect of HRS diagnosis. The clinical assessment must determine whether AKI is due to true volume depletion (prerenal azotemia) or HRS.

Suggested approach:

Discontinue diuretics for at least 48 hours
Administer volume expansion with albumin (1 g/kg/day, maximum 100 g/day for two consecutive days)
Reassess creatinine after volume expansion

If creatinine improves significantly (typically defined as return to within 0.3 mg/dL of baseline), the diagnosis is prerenal azotemia rather than HRS. If creatinine remains elevated despite adequate volume expansion, HRS becomes more likely.

Clinical Pearl: Use albumin rather than crystalloid for volume expansion in this diagnostic approach. Albumin is more effective at expanding intravascular volume in cirrhosis due to its oncotic properties and may have additional beneficial effects on endothelial function and inflammatory mediators.

Step 4: Exclude Shock and Nephrotoxins

Ensure no current bacterial infection (check for SBP with diagnostic paracentesis if ascites is present)
Confirm no recent nephrotoxic drug exposure
Rule out shock states (septic, cardiogenic, or hemorrhagic)

Oyster: Don't forget to consider adrenal insufficiency in critically ill cirrhotic patients. Relative adrenal insufficiency can contribute to hypotension and renal dysfunction and may be reversible with corticosteroid supplementation.

Classification Systems: The Evolution of Diagnostic Criteria

Historical Classification: Type 1 and Type 2 HRS

The traditional classification divided HRS into two types based on the rapidity and severity of renal dysfunction:

Type 1 HRS: Characterized by rapid deterioration in renal function with doubling of serum creatinine to >2.5 mg/dL or a 50% reduction in creatinine clearance to <20 mL/min in less than two weeks. This form is typically precipitated by an identifiable trigger (SBP, GI bleeding) and carries a very poor prognosis with median survival of approximately two weeks without treatment.

Type 2 HRS: A more insidious form with moderate renal failure (creatinine 1.5-2.5 mg/dL) that progresses slowly over weeks to months. These patients typically present with refractory ascites, and median survival without treatment is approximately six months.

Modern Classification: HRS-AKI and HRS-NAKI

In 2015, the International Club of Ascites proposed revised diagnostic criteria that align with the KDIGO AKI criteria and reflect current understanding of the disease spectrum. The new nomenclature includes:

HRS-AKI (Hepatorenal Syndrome-Acute Kidney Injury): Replaces Type 1 HRS. Defined as AKI meeting ICA-AKI criteria (increase in serum creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours or ≥50% from baseline within 7 days) in the absence of response to volume expansion, structural kidney disease, or shock.

The HRS-AKI is further staged according to KDIGO criteria:

Stage 1: Increase in creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL or 1.5-2× from baseline
Stage 2: Creatinine increase >2-3× from baseline
Stage 3: Creatinine increase >3× from baseline or creatinine ≥4.0 mg/dL or initiation of renal replacement therapy

HRS-NAKI (Hepatorenal Syndrome-Non-Acute Kidney Injury): Replaces Type 2 HRS. Represents chronic kidney disease in cirrhosis with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m² for ≥3 months in the absence of other causes of chronic kidney disease.

This updated classification better captures the spectrum of renal dysfunction in cirrhosis and facilitates earlier diagnosis and intervention.

Clinical Hack: When documenting HRS-AKI, always stage it according to KDIGO criteria. This standardization facilitates research, quality improvement initiatives, and communication with nephrologists regarding transplant candidacy and dialysis needs.

Differential Diagnosis: The Critical Distinctions

Several conditions can mimic HRS, and accurate differentiation is essential for appropriate management:

Acute Tubular Necrosis (ATN)

ATN is the most common cause of AKI in hospitalized patients and can coexist with or mimic HRS in cirrhotic patients.

Distinguishing features:

Urinalysis: ATN typically shows granular or epithelial cell casts, FENa >2%, and may have more significant proteinuria
Clinical context: Recent hypotension, sepsis, or nephrotoxin exposure
Response to treatment: ATN may respond to supportive care over days to weeks as tubular cells regenerate

Oyster: The distinction between HRS and ATN is not always clear-cut, and these conditions may represent a spectrum. Some experts propose the term "HRS with ATN" for cases where features of both are present. In practice, initiate HRS-specific therapy if the diagnosis is uncertain, as the treatment (vasoconstrictors plus albumin) has minimal downside and may benefit both conditions.

Prerenal Azotemia

This represents true volume depletion and is potentially the most reversible cause of AKI in cirrhosis.

Distinguishing features:

Responds to volume expansion with albumin within 48 hours
May have clear precipitant (GI bleeding, excessive diuresis, vomiting/diarrhea)
Typically lower FENa (<1%) if not on diuretics

Clinical Pearl: In practice, the two-day albumin challenge (1 g/kg/day × 2 days) serves as both a diagnostic test for prerenal azotemia and therapeutic maneuver. Any patient suspected of having HRS should receive this trial unless volume overload precludes it.

Acute Glomerulonephritis

IgA nephropathy and other glomerular diseases can occur in patients with cirrhosis, particularly those with hepatitis B or C, alcohol use disorder, or autoimmune hepatitis.

Distinguishing features:

Significant proteinuria (typically >1 g/day)
Active urinary sediment with RBC casts
Hematuria
May require kidney biopsy for definitive diagnosis

Drug-Induced Kidney Injury

NSAIDs, aminoglycosides, vancomycin, diuretics, ACE inhibitors, and contrast agents are common culprits.

Clinical Hack: Maintain a high index of suspicion for drug-induced injury. Create a systematic checklist: "In every patient with cirrhosis and AKI, have I reviewed all medications including over-the-counter NSAIDs, herbal supplements, and recent procedures requiring contrast?"

Infection-Related AKI

Bacterial infections, particularly SBP, can cause AKI through multiple mechanisms including sepsis-induced hypotension, cytokine-mediated renal vasoconstriction, and direct bacterial toxin effects.

Key point: Always perform diagnostic paracentesis in patients with cirrhosis, ascites, and AKI to rule out SBP. Even in the absence of symptoms, SBP can precipitate HRS.

Diagnostic Biomarkers: Beyond Creatinine

While serum creatinine remains the primary marker for HRS diagnosis, several biomarkers show promise in improving early detection and differential diagnosis:

Neutrophil Gelatinase-Associated Lipocalin (NGAL)

NGAL is a marker of tubular injury that rises early in ATN. Low urinary and plasma NGAL suggest functional renal impairment (HRS) rather than structural damage (ATN). While not yet routinely available in most centers, NGAL may become part of the diagnostic algorithm in the future.

Cystatin C

This marker of GFR is less affected by muscle mass than creatinine and may provide more accurate assessment of renal function in cirrhotic patients. However, it lacks specificity for differentiating HRS from other causes of AKI.

Copeptin

A stable surrogate marker for vasopressin, copeptin levels correlate with the severity of circulatory dysfunction and may predict HRS development. Research is ongoing regarding its clinical utility.

Oyster: While novel biomarkers are exciting research tools, clinical diagnosis of HRS still relies on traditional criteria. Don't wait for specialized tests when clinical criteria are met—early treatment improves outcomes.

Management Strategies: A Stepwise Approach

Initial Management: The Foundation

Step 1: Identify and Treat Precipitating Factors

Treat infections aggressively with broad-spectrum antibiotics
Discontinue all diuretics and nephrotoxic medications
Correct hypovolemia if present
Control gastrointestinal bleeding

Step 2: Volume Expansion with Albumin

Administer albumin 1 g/kg/day (maximum 100 g/day) for two consecutive days
Reassess creatinine after 48 hours
Continue albumin supplementation during vasoconstrictor therapy

Clinical Pearl: Albumin in HRS is not just a volume expander. Studies suggest albumin has pleiotropic effects including improvement in cardiac function, reduced systemic inflammation, and enhanced antibiotic activity. Albumin should be considered a pharmacologic agent in HRS management, not merely a colloid.

Pharmacologic Therapy: Vasoconstrictors

The cornerstone of HRS-AKI treatment is vasoconstrictor therapy combined with albumin to counteract splanchnic vasodilation and improve renal perfusion.

Terlipressin (Not FDA-Approved in the United States)

Terlipressin, a vasopressin analogue, is the most extensively studied and recommended first-line agent in most international guidelines.

Dosing:

Initial: 1 mg IV every 4-6 hours (or 2 mg every 12 hours)
If creatinine does not decrease by ≥25% after 3 days, increase to 2 mg every 4-6 hours
Continue until serum creatinine ≤1.5 mg/dL or maximum 14 days
Combine with albumin 20-40 g/day

Response rates: 40-50% overall, with higher rates in less severe HRS-AKI

Adverse effects: Ischemic complications (cardiac, peripheral, mesenteric) in 5-10%, often manageable with dose reduction

Oyster: Continuous infusion of terlipressin (2-12 mg/day) may be as effective as bolus dosing with potentially fewer ischemic complications. Consider this approach in patients at high cardiovascular risk.

Norepinephrine

Norepinephrine is increasingly recognized as an effective alternative to terlipressin, particularly in countries where terlipressin is unavailable (including the United States prior to FDA approval).

Dosing:

Start at 0.5 mg/hour IV infusion
Titrate up to 3 mg/hour to achieve MAP increase of 10 mmHg
Combine with albumin as with terlipressin
Requires ICU admission for continuous monitoring

Advantages: Widely available, extensive clinical experience, titratable Disadvantages: Requires ICU-level care, no oral formulation

Recent meta-analyses suggest norepinephrine may be equivalent to terlipressin in efficacy with possibly fewer adverse effects.

Midodrine Plus Octreotide

This oral/subcutaneous combination is sometimes used, particularly in the United States, though evidence supporting its efficacy is weaker than for terlipressin or norepinephrine.

Dosing:

Midodrine: 7.5 mg PO three times daily, can increase to 12.5-15 mg three times daily
Octreotide: 100-200 mcg subcutaneously three times daily
Albumin as above

Clinical Hack: While data supporting midodrine/octreotide are limited, this regimen may be considered for patients with HRS-AKI stage 1 who are not sick enough to require ICU admission, or as a bridge therapy while awaiting transfer or liver transplantation evaluation.

Renal Replacement Therapy

Dialysis does not treat the underlying pathophysiology of HRS but may be necessary for managing complications of renal failure (hyperkalemia, acidosis, volume overload, uremic symptoms) while awaiting definitive therapy.

Indications:

Standard indications for dialysis (refractory hyperkalemia, acidosis, uremia, volume overload)
Bridge to liver transplantation
HRS-AKI stage 3 not responding to medical therapy

Important consideration: Initiation of dialysis in non-transplant candidates with HRS carries a very poor prognosis and should be undertaken only after careful consideration of goals of care and discussion with the patient and family.

Clinical Pearl: The decision to initiate dialysis in HRS should always be made in the context of liver transplant candidacy. If the patient is a transplant candidate, dialysis is a reasonable bridge. If not a candidate, dialysis is rarely beneficial and may prolong suffering without meaningful chance of recovery.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS)

TIPS can improve renal function in selected patients with HRS by reducing portal pressure and improving systemic hemodynamics.

Considerations:

Most beneficial in HRS-NAKI (formerly Type 2)
Limited role in HRS-AKI due to disease acuity and procedural risks
Contraindications: hepatic encephalopathy, cardiac dysfunction, bilirubin >5 mg/dL
Requires careful patient selection by multidisciplinary team

Liver Transplantation: Definitive Therapy

Liver transplantation is the only definitive treatment for HRS, addressing both the underlying liver disease and the renal dysfunction.

Key points:

HRS-AKI increases mortality on the transplant waiting list and is incorporated into organ allocation systems (MELD-Na score)
Most patients with HRS-AKI will recover renal function after liver transplantation alone
Simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation should be considered for patients with:
- HRS-AKI requiring dialysis for >6 weeks
- Baseline CKD (eGFR <30 mL/min for >90 days prior to HRS)
- Metabolic disease affecting both organs

Clinical Hack: Early consultation with transplant hepatology is crucial. Don't wait until the patient is critically ill to initiate the evaluation process, as many patients with advanced cirrhosis and refractory ascites are at high risk for HRS.

Prevention Strategies: Proactive Management

Prevention of HRS is more effective than treatment, and several evidence-based strategies can reduce HRS incidence:

Primary Prophylaxis in SBP

Patients with SBP are at high risk for HRS despite appropriate antibiotics. The landmark study by Sort et al. (1999) demonstrated that albumin infusion (1.5 g/kg within 6 hours of diagnosis, followed by 1 g/kg on day 3) significantly reduced HRS incidence and improved survival.

Standard of care: All patients with SBP should receive albumin in addition to antibiotics unless contraindicated by volume overload.

Albumin with Large-Volume Paracentesis

Removal of >5 liters of ascitic fluid without plasma expansion can precipitate post-paracentesis circulatory dysfunction and HRS.

Recommendation: Administer 8 g of albumin per liter of ascites removed when performing large-volume paracentesis (>5 liters).

Pentoxifylline in Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis

Some studies suggest pentoxifylline may reduce HRS incidence in severe alcoholic hepatitis, though evidence is mixed and not universally adopted.

Judicious Use of Diuretics

Avoid over-diuresis. Target weight loss should not exceed 0.5 kg/day in patients with edema alone, or 1 kg/day in patients with both ascites and edema. Monitor electrolytes and creatinine closely.

Avoidance of Nephrotoxins

Systematically avoid:

NSAIDs (provide alternative analgesics such as acetaminophen)
Aminoglycosides (use alternative antibiotics)
Radiocontrast agents (use contrast-sparing imaging when possible)
ACE inhibitors and ARBs in advanced cirrhosis

Oyster: Create standardized order sets and alert systems in your institution to prevent inadvertent nephrotoxin administration in cirrhotic patients. Simple system changes can prevent many cases of AKI.

Prognosis: Setting Realistic Expectations

The prognosis of HRS depends on severity, underlying liver disease, response to treatment, and transplant candidacy.

HRS-AKI without treatment:

Stage 1: Variable, may remain stable or progress
Stage 3: Median survival 2 weeks, 90% mortality within 3 months

HRS-AKI with treatment:

Reversal of HRS (creatinine ≤1.5 mg/dL) achieved in 40-50% with vasoconstrictors plus albumin
Complete responders have significantly improved transplant-free survival
Partial responders (improvement but not normalization) have intermediate outcomes
Non-responders have very poor prognosis without transplantation

Post-liver transplantation:

Most patients with HRS-AKI recover renal function after transplant
Pre-transplant renal replacement therapy duration predicts post-transplant renal recovery
Long-term chronic kidney disease may develop in some patients

Clinical Pearl: When counseling patients and families, emphasize that HRS is reversible with treatment, particularly with liver transplantation. Maintain realistic optimism while acknowledging the seriousness of the condition.

Special Populations and Considerations

HRS in Acute Liver Failure

HRS can occur in acute liver failure, though less commonly than in cirrhosis. The pathophysiology differs somewhat, with increased cardiac output and less pronounced RAAS activation. Management principles are similar, with emphasis on treating the underlying cause and considering urgent liver transplantation.

HRS in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF)

ACLF represents acute decompensation in patients with chronic liver disease, often with multi-organ failure. HRS-AKI in the context of ACLF portends particularly poor prognosis. Aggressive treatment with vasoconstrictors and albumin is warranted in transplant candidates, but careful goals-of-care discussions are essential in non-candidates given the high mortality.

Pediatric HRS

While rare, HRS can occur in children with cirrhosis. Diagnostic criteria and management principles are similar to adults, with dosing adjustments based on weight. Albumin and vasoconstrictors have been used successfully, though evidence is limited to case series.

Pearls for Clinical Practice

Think HRS early: In any patient with cirrhosis and ascites who develops AKI, immediately consider HRS and begin the diagnostic evaluation.
Albumin is therapeutic, not just diagnostic: The albumin challenge is both a diagnostic test and the foundation of treatment. Don't withhold albumin from patients with suspected HRS.
Time matters: Earlier initiation of vasoconstrictor therapy (at stage 1 rather than stage 3 HRS-AKI) is associated with better outcomes. Don't wait for severe renal failure to begin treatment.
Prevention is paramount: Most HRS is preventable. Implement systematic approaches to avoid nephrotoxins, provide albumin with SBP and large-volume paracentesis, and avoid over-diuresis.
Multidisciplinary approach: Optimal management requires collaboration between hepatologists, nephrologists, intensivists, and transplant teams. Early involvement of all stakeholders improves outcomes.
Individualized goals of care: Not all patients with HRS are liver transplant candidates. Honest, compassionate conversations about prognosis and treatment goals are essential.
Don't forget supportive care: While focusing on HRS-specific treatments, maintain attention to overall management of cirrhosis including nutrition, infection prevention, and encephalopathy management.

Future Directions

Research continues to refine our understanding and management of HRS:

Novel biomarkers: Improved early detection and differentiation from ATN
Targeted therapies: Agents targeting specific pathophysiologic mechanisms (endothelin receptor antagonists, adenosine antagonists)
Optimized albumin use: Defining optimal dosing and duration
Risk prediction models: Better identification of high-risk patients for preventive strategies
Mechanical support: Role of albumin dialysis and liver support devices

Conclusion

Hepatorenal syndrome represents a critical complication of advanced liver disease that demands prompt recognition, accurate diagnosis, and aggressive management. The evolution from the simple Type 1/Type 2 classification to the more nuanced HRS-AKI staging reflects improved understanding of the disease spectrum and facilitates earlier intervention.

For the practicing internist, maintaining a high index of suspicion in at-risk patients, systematic application of diagnostic criteria to differentiate HRS from other causes of AKI, and early initiation of appropriate therapy are key to improving outcomes. The combination of vasoconstrictors and albumin has transformed HRS from an inevitably fatal diagnosis to a potentially reversible condition, particularly in patients who are liver transplant candidates.

Looking forward, continued research into pathophysiology, biomarkers, and targeted therapies holds promise for further improving outcomes. However, the most impactful interventions remain those we can implement today: systematic prevention strategies, early recognition, prompt treatment, and timely referral for liver transplantation evaluation.

Key References

Angeli P, et al. Diagnosis and management of acute kidney injury in patients with cirrhosis: revised consensus recommendations of the International Club of Ascites. J Hepatol. 2015;62(4):968-974.
Gines P, Schrier RW. Renal failure in cirrhosis. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(13):1279-1290.
Salerno F, et al. Diagnosis, prevention and treatment of hepatorenal syndrome in cirrhosis. Gut. 2007;56(9):1310-1318.
Sort P, et al. Effect of intravenous albumin on renal impairment and mortality in patients with cirrhosis and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(6):403-409.
Sanyal AJ, et al. A randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of terlipressin for type 1 hepatorenal syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2008;134(5):1360-1368.
Martin-Llahi M, et al. Terlipressin and albumin vs albumin in patients with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome: a randomized study. Gastroenterology. 2008;134(5):1352-1359.
Singh V, et al. Noradrenaline vs. terlipressin in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome: a randomized study. J Hepatol. 2012;56(6):1293-1298.
Alessandria C, et al. MELD score and clinical type predict prognosis in hepatorenal syndrome: relevance to liver transplantation. Hepatology. 2005;41(6):1282-1289.
Cardenas A, Gines P. Management of complications of cirrhosis in patients awaiting liver transplantation. J Hepatol. 2005;42 Suppl:S124-133.
Nadim MK, et al. Hepatorenal syndrome: the 8th International Consensus Conference of the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative (ADQI) Group. Crit Care. 2012;16(1):R23.
Francoz C, et al. Renal dysfunction and acute kidney injury in cirrhosis. Clin Res Hepatol Gastroenterol. 2015;39(5):594-605.
Piano S, et al. Evaluation of the Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and ascites. J Hepatol. 2013;59(3):482-489.
Belcher JM, et al. Association of AKI with mortality and complications in hospitalized patients with cirrhosis. Hepatology. 2013;57(2):753-762.
Wong F, et al. Working Party proposal for a revised classification system of renal dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis. Gut. 2011;60(5):702-709.
Angeli P, et al. Hepatorenal syndrome. Contrib Nephrol. 2011;174:46-55.

Word Count: Approximately 4,000 words

Disclosure: This review article is intended for educational purposes for postgraduate medical students and consultant physicians in internal medicine and does not constitute clinical practice guidelines. Individual patient management should be tailored to specific clinical circumstances in consultation with appropriate specialists.