Skip to main content
Download PDF

Angiotensin receptor blockers might be protective against hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation

BMC Gastroenterology volume 23, Article number: 152 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Hepatic steatosis is an increasing complication in liver transplant recipients. Currently, there is no pharmacologic therapy for treatment of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. The aim of this study was to determine the association between use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) and hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients.

Methods

We conducted a case-control analysis on data from Shiraz Liver Transplant Registry. Liver transplant recipients with and without hepatic steatosis were compared for risk factors including use of ARB.

Results

A total of 103 liver transplant recipients were included in the study. Thirty five patients treated with ARB and 68 patients (66%) did not receive these medications. In univariate analysis, ARB use (P = 0.002), serum triglyceride (P = 0.006), weight after liver transplantation (P = 0.011) and etiology of liver disease (P = 0.008) were associated with hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. In multivariate regression analysis, ARB use was associated with lower likelihood of hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients (OR = 0.303, 95% CI: 0.117–0.784; P = 0.014). Mean duration of ARB use (P = 0.024) and mean cumulative daily dose of ARB (P = 0.015) were significantly lower in patients with hepatic steatosis.

Conclusion

Our study showed that ARB use was associated with reduced incidence of hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), recently suggested to rename as metabolic dysfunction associated fatty liver (MAFLD), is a rapidly growing disease worldwide and is going to become the most common cause of liver cirrhosis and liver transplantation [1, 2]. It has been suggested that the rising prevalence of diabetes mellitus and obesity are mainly responsible for the increasing prevalence of NAFLD [3]. De novo development or recurrence of hepatic steatosis have been frequently reported after liver transplantation. De novo steatosis or non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) have been reported in up to 33% of post liver transplant biopsies 3 years after transplantation [4]. Using ultrasound, we have previously reported that the occurrence of steatosis after liver transplantation was up to 56% in patients with NASH and more than 26% in patients with cryptogenic cirrhosis [5].

The main treatment of NAFLD is life style modification including exercise, weight loss and dietary regimen [6, 7]. It has been reported that 10% weight reduction in patients with NASH will result in improvement of not only steatosis but also inflammation and fibrosis [8]. On the other hand, several medications targeted against different pathogenic mechanisms of hepatic steatosis have been suggested and prescribed as treatment of NAFLD in clinical practice [9, 10]. At present, there is no suggested medication for treatment or prevention of NAFLD after liver transplantation and current recommendations are mainly derived from clinical evidences in non- transplant setting. Considering high rate of NAFLD after liver transplantation, that might negatively impact liver allograft, other preventive or therapeutic interventions might be required.

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) are a group of agents that binds to angiotensin II type I receptor and result in inhibition of renin angiotensin system [11]. These are widely used for treatment of arterial hypertension, diabetic nephropathy and hypertensive cardiovascular disease [12]. While some ARB may rarely cause cholestatic hepatitis some recent studies have reported beneficial effects of inhibition of renin angiotensin system for the treatment of NAFLD/NASH [13, 14]. However, clinical application of this class of anti-hypertensive medications in liver transplant recipients has not been well elucidated. This study aimed to investigate association between use of ARB and NAFLD in liver transplant recipients.

Materials and methods

We used data set of Shiraz Transplant Center, a referral liver transplant center in Iran. We used data of adult (> 18 years) liver transplant recipients including information about age, sex, underlying liver disease, date of transplantation, laboratory data, post-transplant diabetes mellitus (PTDM), hyperlipidemia, hypertension, rejection episodes, immunosuppression regimens and other medications. All the patients included in the study were followed until April 2019. Measurement of height and weight was performed and recorded at the time of last clinical visit. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated using this formula: Weight (kg)/ Height (m)2. Patients labeled as cryptogenic cirrhosis with BMI > 25 Kg/m2 were considered as having NASH as underlying cause of liver cirrhosis.

Hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation was diagnosed by abdominal ultrasonography. Patients were examined with both supine and left posterior oblique positions in longitudinal, transverse, and oblique scanning planes. Hepatic steatosis was diagnosed based on these 4 criteria in ultrasound: liver brightness, hepatorenal echo contrast, and vascular blurring, deep attenuation. Grade of liver steatosis was described based on the severity of liver echogenicity and classified as grade 0, grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3; grade 0: normal echogenicity; grade 1: slight, diffuse increase in fine echoes in liver parenchyma; grade 2: moderate impaired visualization of intrahepatic vessels and diaphragm with diffuse increase in fine echoes of liver parenchyma; grade 3: marked increase in the fine echoes of liver parenchyma [15].

Liver transplant recipients with hepatic steatosis after liver transplant diagnosed by ultrasound were compared to those without hepatic steatosis as controls. Patients and controls were matched based on the time of follow-up, sex, age, and time of liver transplant.

Liver transplant recipients were routinely visited at our outpatient clinic and ARB users and non-users were distinguished based on the prescription of ARB by clinicians and confirmation of ARB use by patients. The total time of ARB treatment had to be more than 3 months by the patient to be included in the study. Defined daily dose (DDD) was defined as the assumed average maintenance dose per day for ARB used for their main indication in adults. Cumulative defined daily dose (cDDD) of ARB was assessed in relation to duration and daily dose of use for losartan and valsartan. cDDD was calculated by summing the DDD from the beginning to the und of use of ARB in an individual patient and classified to < 20 and ≥ 20 gram [16]. Other ARB were not used by our patients.

Statistical analysis

Continuous and categorical variables were compared using Student’s t-test and Chi-square test, respectively. Non-parametric Mann Whitney U test was used when appropriate. Numeric variables were presented as means ± standard deviation and categorical variables were presented as percents and counts. Variables with statistically significant difference during univariate analysis in patients with and without hepatic steatosis were included in a regression model. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent variables associated with NAFLD after liver transplantation. SPSS 18.0 (SPSS Inc.; Chicago, IL, USA) software was used for statistical analysis. A P- value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Totally, 103 liver transplant recipients were included in the study. Thirty five (34%) patients treated with ARB. They were compared to 68 patients (66%) who did not receive these medications. In ARB group, 27 patients (77.1%) received losartan and 8 patients (22.8%) received valsartan. All patients who received ARB had hypertension and 11 patients had diabetic albuminuria. No adverse reaction related to use of ARB was reported in our patients treating with these medications. Characteristics of patients with and without ARB therapy are summarized in Table 1. Baseline characteristics of patients with and without hepatic steatosis are outlined in Table 2. The 2 groups were not different in terms of matching variables including age, sex, and components of metabolic syndrome. Totally, 54 patients developed hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. Mean time form liver transplant to development of hepatic steatosis was 18 ± 14.87 months. In univariate analysis, 11 (20.4%) patients with hepatic steatosis used ARB versus 24 (49%) patients without hepatic steatosis (OR: 0.266; 95% CI: 0.112–0.634; P = 0.002). Underlying cause of cirrhosis (NASH versus other causes) (OR: 2.928; 95% CI: 1.314–6.526; P = 0.008), serum triglyceride (P = 0.006) and weight after liver transplant (P = 0.011) were also associated with development of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation (Table 2). In a regression model, we included serum triglyceride, ARB use, weight after liver transplantation, and etiology of liver disease. In regression model, ARB use was associated with lower likelihood of hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients (OR = 0.303, 95% CI: 0.117–0.784; P = 0.014) (Table 3).

Table 1 Characteristics of patients with and without angiotensin receptor blockers therapy
Full size table
Table 2 Characteristics of patients with and without hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation
Full size table
Table 3 Multivariate logistic regression analysis of risk factors of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation
Full size table

Among 35 patients using ARB, 11 patients developed hepatic steatosis. Seven patients had grade 1 hepatic steatosis, 3 patients had grade 2 hepatic steatosis and 1 patient had grade 3 hepatic steatosis. In non ARB users (n = 68), 31 patients had grade 1 hepatic steatosis, 9 patients had grade 2 hepatic steatosis and 3 patients had grade 3 hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation (Fig. 1). Mean duration of ARB use (P = 0.024) and mean cumulative daily dose of ARB (P = 0.015) were significantly lower in patients with hepatic steatosis compared to those without hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation (Table 4). There was no statistically significant difference between losartan and valsartan use in terms of development of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation (P = 0.722) (Table 4). Liver transplant recipients receiving ARB < 20 months were more likely to develop hepatic steatosis compared to those receiving ARB ≥ 20 months (OR: 0.180; 95% CI: 0.032–0.990 ; P = 0.037). There were no association between metformin use, statin use, prednisolone use and hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation (P > 0.05) (Fig. 2). Comparison of patients with and without hepatic steatosis in a subgroup of patients who used ARB is outlined in Table 5.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Different grades of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation in patients with and without ARB treatment

Full size image
Table 4 Relationship between ARB use and hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation according to type of ARB, duration and cumulative dose of ARB
Full size table
Fig. 2
figure 2

The association between metformin, statins, prednisolone and fibrates use and hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation

Full size image
Table 5 Characteristics of participants with and without hepatic steatosis in a subgroup of patients receiving ARB after liver transplantation
Full size table

Discussion

In this study, we found that liver transplant recipients receiving ARB were less likely to develop hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. Among liver transplant recipients who were treated with ARB, those who received higher defined daily doses of ARB were more protected against hepatic steatosis. Mean cumulative DDD of ARB and duration of ARB were higher in those without hepatic steatosis compared to those with hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. Our findings showed that use of ARB was safe and well tolerated in post liver transplant period.

Recurrent or de novo hepatic steatosis is highly prevalent after liver transplantation and is increasingly reported in different studies [17, 18]. However, no pharmacologic therapy has been recommended yet. In addition to metabolic abnormalities in post-transplant period [19], several other mechanisms have been proposed for pathogenesis of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation [20, 21]. Cumulative evidence suggest that renin angiotensin system (RAS) might have crucial role in pathogenesis of NAFLD [22]. The biologically active end–product of RAS is angiotensin II which acts through activation of its two receptors angiotensin receptors I (ATR1) and II (ATR2) [23]. Genetic polymorphisms in ATR1 have been reported to be associated with NAFLD, insulin resistance and post prandial accumulation of cholesterol and triglyceride in the hepatocytes [24, 25]. Wu et al. reported that increased activation of RAS components in high fat diet mice was associated with increased plasma levels of lipid profile [26]. In an animal study on insulin resistant rats, it has been shown that activation of ATR1 contributed to protein oxidation, impaired hepatic lipid and antioxidant metabolism and promotion of hepatic steatosis. In this study, ARB treatment improved lipid profile and metabolic abnormalities [27]. In another animal study, olmesartan, an ARB, treatment was capable of attenuation of hepatic overproduction and accumulation of triglyceride in relation to insulin resistance [28]. Tao et al. showed that angiotensinogen (the precursor of angiotensin peptides) has a main role in hepatic steatosis as hepatocyte angiotensinogen deficient mice have attenuated liver steatosis and less weight gain [29]. Angiotensin II is also a promoter of hepatic fibrosis by activation of hepatic stellate cells (HSC) and up-regulation of fibrosis biomarkers [30]. In another study, it was demonstrated that activation of Janus kinase-2 (JAK-2) induced hepatic fibrosis is mediated through stimulation of ATR1 and prevented by pharmacologic inhibition of JAK-2 [31]. In a rat model of NASH, it has been reported that angiotensin II augmented activation of hepatic stellate cells via toll like receptor-4 signaling and ATR1 [32].

Results of human studies about efficacy of ARB on treatment of NAFLD have been conflicting while promising. In FANTASY trial, no significant improvement in liver enzymes was observed by losartan treatment in patients with NAFLD while telmisartan showed some beneficial effects [33]. In a randomized cross-over trial among pediatric patients with NAFLD, treatment with losartan for 8 weeks was associated with improvement of liver enzymes and insulin resistance compared to the placebo [34]. Combination of losartan and simvastatin was effective in amelioration of liver steatosis and decreasing subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue in hypertensive patients with NAFLD [35].

This study has several strengths. There has been lack of data about post-transplant treatment of hepatic steatosis. Furthermore, there is no approved pharmacologic therapy for recurrent or de-novo hepatic seatosis after liver transplantation. Our study provided the first clinical evidence suggesting that losartan and valsartan treatment might be protective against hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients. We addressed confounding variables by matching each study patient in regard to sex, age, date of liver transplant. We also showed that other medications including statins, metformin and prednisolone had no significant impact on development of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. The study is however limited for the retrospective design and rather small sample size. Steatosis was also diagnosed by ultrasound while other diagnostic methods like liver biopsy and controlled attenuation parameter might be better estimates for liver steatosis.

In conclusion, ARB use may have beneficial protective effects against hepatic steatosis in liver transplant recipients. Results of this study, while promising, should be verified in randomized clinical trials before any recommendations for treatment of hepatic steatosis with ARB in this group of patients.

Data Availability

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to keeping privacy of patients but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

ARB:

Angiotensin receptor blockers

PTDM:

Post-transplant diabetes mellitus

NAFLD:

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease

NASH:

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis

References

  1. Holmer M, Melum E, Isoniemi H, et al. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is an increasing indication for liver transplantation in the nordic countries. Liver Int. 2018;38(11):2082–2090.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Eshraghian A, Nikeghbalian S, Dehghani M, et al. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is the most rapidly growing indication for liver transplantation in iranian patients. Exp Clin Transplant. 2019 Oct 1. https://doi.org/10.6002/ect.2019.0205.

  3. Younossi ZM, Koenig AB, Abdelatif D, Fazel Y, Henry L, Wymer M. Global epidemiology of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: metaanalytic assessment of prevalence, incidence, and outcomes. Hepatology. 2016;64(1):73–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Galvin Z, Rajakumar R, Chen E, et al. Predictors of De Novo nonalcoholic fatty liver Disease after Liver Transplantation and Associated Fibrosis. Liver Transpl 2019;25(1):56–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/lt.25338.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Eshraghian A, Nikeghbalian S, Kazemi K, Shamsaeefar A, Geramizadeh B, Malek-Hosseini SA. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease after liver transplantation in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and cryptogenic cirrhosis: the impact of pre-transplant graft steatosis. HPB (Oxford). 2019 Aug 17. Pii: S1365-182X(19)30634-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2019.07.015.

  6. Abenavoli L, Di Renzo L, Boccuto L, Alwardat N, Gratteri S, De Lorenzo A. Health benefits of Mediterranean diet in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;12(9):873–881.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wong VW, Wong GL, Chan RS, et al. Beneficial effects of lifestyle intervention in non-obese patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. J Hepatol 2018;69(6):1349–1356.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Marchesini G, Petta S, Dalle Grave R. Diet, weight loss, and liver health in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: pathophysiology, evidence, and practice. Hepatology 2016;63(6):2032–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eshraghian A. Current and emerging pharmacological therapy for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. World J Gastroenterol 2017;14;23(42):7495–7504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ganesh S, Rustgi VK. Current pharmacologic therapy for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Clin Liver Dis. 2016;20(2):351–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Omboni S, Volpe M. Angiotensin receptor blockers Versus Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors for the treatment of arterial hypertension and the role of Olmesartan. Adv Ther 2019;36(2):278–297.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Epstein BJ, Smith SM, Choksi R. Recent changes in the landscape of combination RAS blockade. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2009;7(11):1373–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Andrade RJ, Lucena MI, Fernández MC, et al. Cholestatic hepatitis related to use of irbesartan: a case report and a literature review of angiotensin II antagonist-associated hepatotoxicity. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2002;14(8):887–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Goh GB, Pagadala MR, Dasarathy J, et al.Renin-angiotensin system and fibrosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Liver Int 2015;35(3):979–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mishra P, Younossi ZM. Abdominal ultrasound for diagnosis of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:2716–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01520.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yeh JJ, Kuo IL, Yip HT, Hsueh MY, Hsu CY, Kao CH. Effects of colchicine use on ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke risk in diabetic patients with and without gout. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):9195. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-13133-0. PMID: 35655077.

  17. Dumortier J, Giostra E, Belbouab S, et al. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in liver transplant recipients: another story of “seed and soil”. Am J Gastroenterol 2010;105(3):613–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Vallin M, Guillaud O, Boillot O, Hervieu V, Scoazec JY, Dumortier J. Recurrent or de novo nonalcoholic fatty liver disease after liver transplantation: natural history based on liver biopsy analysis. Liver Transpl 2014;20(9):1064–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Eshraghian A, Fattahi MR, Taghavi A, et al. Metabolic syndrome, hepatic fibrosis, and steatosis diagnosed by liver stiffness measurement and controlled attenuation parameter after liver transplantation: the impact on long-term survival. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/17474124.2022.2137488. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 36254767.

  20. Eshraghian A, Nikeghbalian S, Shamsaeefar A, Kazemi K, Fattahi MR, Malek-Hosseini SA. Hepatic steatosis and liver fat contents in liver transplant recipients are associated with serum adipokines and insulin resistance. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12701. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69571-1. PMID: 32728230.

  21. Eshraghian A, Moasser E, Azarpira N, et al. Variations in TM6SF2, PCSK9 and PCSK7 genes and risk of hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation: a cross-sectional study. BMC Gastroenterol. 2021;21(1):458. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-021-02041-8. PMID: 34876018.

  22. Paschos P, Tziomalos K. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and the renin-angiotensin system: implications for treatment. World J Hepatol 2012;4(12):327–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fyhrquist F, Saijonmaa O. Renin-angiotensin system revisited. J Intern Med 2008;264:224–236.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Eshraghian A, Iravani S, Azimzadeh P. The Association between Angiotensin II type 1 receptor gene A1166C polymorphism and non-alcoholic fatty liver Disease and its severity. Middle East J Dig Dis. 2018;10(2):96–104.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Musso G, Saba F, Cassader M, et al. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor rs5186 gene variant predicts Incident NAFLD and Associated Hypertension: role of Dietary Fat-Induced pro-inflammatory cell activation. Am J Gastroenterol 2019;114(4):607–619.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wu Y, Ma KL, Zhang Y, et al. Lipid disorder and intrahepatic renin-angiotensin system activation synergistically contribute to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Liver Int 2016;36(10):1525–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Montez P, Vázquez-Medina JP, Rodríguez R, et al. Angiotensin receptor blockade recovers hepatic UCP2 expression and aconitase and SDH activities and ameliorates hepatic oxidative damage in insulin resistant rats. Endocrinology 2012;153(12):5746–59.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Ran J, Hirano T, Adachi M. Angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker ameliorates overproduction and accumulation of triglyceride in the liver of Zucker fatty rats. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2004;287(2):E227-32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tao XR, Rong JB, Lu HS, et al. Angiotensinogen in Hepatocytes contributes to Western Diet-induced liver steatosis. J Lipid Res 2019;60(12):1983–1995.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zhang X, Zhang F, Kong D, et al. Tetramethylpyrazine inhibits angiotensin II-induced activation of hepatic stellate cells associated with interference of platelet-derived growth factor β receptor pathways. FEBS J 2014;281(12):2754–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Granzow M, Schierwagen R, Klein S, et al. Angiotensin-II type 1 receptor-mediated Janus kinase 2 activation induces liver fibrosis. Hepatology 2014;60(1):334–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Shirai Y, Yoshiji H, Noguchi R, et al. Cross talk between toll-like receptor-4 signaling and angiotensin-II in liver fibrosis development in the rat model of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;28(4):723–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hirata T, Tomita K, Kawai T, et al. Effect of Telmisartan or Losartan for Treatment of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: Fatty Liver Protection Trial by Telmisartan or Losartan Study (FANTASY). Int J Endocrinol 2013;2013:587140.

  34. Vos MB, Jin R, Konomi JV, et al. A randomized, controlled, crossover pilot study of losartan for pediatric nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2018;4:109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Fogari R, Maffioli P, Mugellini A, Zoppi A, Lazzari P, Derosa G. Effects of losartan and amlodipine alone or combined with simvastatin in hypertensive patients with nonalcoholic hepatic steatosis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012;24(2):164–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

There was no funding source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Shiraz Transplant Center, Abu-Ali Sina Hospital, 71994-67985, Shiraz, Iran

    Ahad Eshraghian, Alireza Taghavi, Hamed Nikoupour, Saman Nikeghbalian & Seyed Ali Malek-Hosseini

  2. Shiraz Transplant Center, Abu-Ali Sina Hospital, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

    Alireza Taghavi, Hamed Nikoupour, Saman Nikeghbalian & Seyed Ali Malek-Hosseini

Authors
  1. Ahad Eshraghian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alireza Taghavi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hamed Nikoupour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Saman Nikeghbalian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Seyed Ali Malek-Hosseini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AE: Study concept and design; acquisition of data; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content; statistical analysis. AT, HN, SN, SAM: acquisition of data; analysis and interpretation of data; critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ahad Eshraghian.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of Shiraz Transplant Center, Abu-Ali Sina hospital. Written informed consents were obtained from each patient. The study protocol was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration as revised in Fortaleza 2013.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eshraghian, A., Taghavi, A., Nikoupour, H. et al. Angiotensin receptor blockers might be protective against hepatic steatosis after liver transplantation. BMC Gastroenterol 23, 152 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-023-02781-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-023-02781-9

Keywords

BMC Gastroenterology

ISSN: 1471-230X

Contact us