Review
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Hepatol. Oct 27, 2021; 13(10): 1215-1233
Published online Oct 27, 2021. doi: 10.4254/wjh.v13.i10.1215
Table 1 Reported definitions for liver injury in coronavirus disease 2019
Term
Definition(s)
Liver disorder Serum ALT or AST > 2 × ULN, TB > 2 × ULN, ALP ≥ 2 ULN[75]
Liver injury or acute liver injury ALT and/or AST above 3 × ULN, ALP, GGT, and/or TB above 2 × ULN[9,34]
ALT and/or AST ≥ 2 × ULN, with TB ≥ 2 × ULN and/or INR ≥ 1.7[70]
ALT levels above 3 × the ULN[28]
Mild liver injury ALT above the ULN and below 2 × the ULN[25]
Moderate liver injury ALT between 2-5 × the ULN[25]
Severe liver injuryALT above 5 × the ULN[25]
Any elevation of enzymes above 3 × the ULN and bilirubin above 2 × the ULN[5]
Liver test abnormalitiesElevation of the following serum liver enzymes: ALT > 40 U/L, AST > 40 U/L, GGT > 49 U/L, ALP > 135 U/L, and TB > 17.1 μmol/L[34]
De novo LFTs abnormalityThe occurrence of abnormal LFTs in patients with normal LFTs at admission[27]
LFTs elevation Increase in serum liver enzyme levels above the ULN[27,28]
Mild LFTs elevationsElevation 1-2 times above the ULN[25,34]
Hepatocellular or hepatocyte typeThe pattern of abnormal LFTs with predominantly elevated ALT and AST[27]
Patients with raised ALT and/or AST more than 3 × the ULN[34]
AST/ALT activity is higher than the ALP/GGT activity, with liver enzyme activities calculated by multiples of their ULN[34]
Cholestatic or cholangiocyte typePattern of abnormal LFTs with predominantly elevated ALP and GGT[27]
Patients with raised ALP or GGT 2 × the ULN[34]
ALP/GGT activity was higher than the AST/ALT activity, with the liver enzyme activities calculated by multiples of their ULN[34]
Mixed typeMixed pattern when the extents of AST/ALT and ALP/GGT are similar[27]
A combination of both ALT/AST elevated more than 3 × the ULN and ALP/GGT twice the ULN[34]
Drug-induced liver injuryAny elevation in liver enzymes or TB after the initiation of the drug in the absence of identified common causes of liver disease[5]
Table 2 Reported data on survivors versus non-survivors in coronavirus disease 2019
Ref.
N (all) n (non-survivors)
Age (year)
Male
Pre-existing CLD
Type of liver disease
Elevated LFTs on admission (%)
LFTs levels on admission. ALT/AST/ALP/GGT (U/L)/TB (μmoL)
Selected complications or clinical outcomes
Cao et al[51]. China N = 102 (n = 17)53 vs 7247.1% vs 76.5%2.4% vs 5.9%-ALT: NR vs 41.1%ALT: NR vs 40ALI: 24.7% vs 76.5%; ARDS: 5.9% vs 88.2%; Shock: 3.5% vs 41.1%; MV: 2.4% vs 70.6%
Chen et al[52]. China N = 274 (n = 113)51 vs 6855% vs 73%-HBV surface antigen positivityALT: 19% vs 27%; AST: 16% vs 52%ALT: 20 vs 28; AST: 25 vs 45; ALP: 64 vs 76; GGT: 28 vs 42; TB: 8.4 vs 12.6ALI: 2% vs 9%; ARDS: 52% vs 100%; Shock: 0% vs 41%; MV: 82% vs 16%
Chen et al[53]. China N = 55 (n = 19)172 vs 7750% vs 84.2%2.8% vs 5.3%-ALT: 19.4% vs 31.6%; AST: 50% vs 73.7%ALT: 40 vs 44;AST: 55 vs 78MV: 30.6% vs 68.4%
Du et al[54]. China N = 85265.872.9%5.9%-ALT: 16.5%; AST: 32.9%; TB: 35.3%ALT: 72.9; AST: 94.4; TB: 18.4ALI: 35.3%; ARDS: 74.1%; Shock: 81.2%; MV: 93%3
Wu et al[42]. China N = 84 (n = 44)450 vs 68.577.5% vs 65.9%3.5%5--ALT: 35 vs 39; AST: 38.5 vs 37; TB: 11.6 vs 14.5MV: 57.5% vs 97.8%3; Others reported as association
Yang et al[55]. China N = 92269.853.3%3.3%--ALT: 27; AST: 31; TB: 13.6 ALI: 16.5%; ARDS: 80.2%; MODS: 15.4%
Yang et al[39]. China N = 52 (n = 32)51.9 vs 64.670% vs 66%---TB: 13.1 vs 19.5ALI: 30% vs 28%; ARDS: 45% vs 81%; MV: 35% vs 94%
Zhang et al[44]. ChinaN = 82272.565.9%2.4%-ALT: 30.6%; AST: 61.1%; TB: 30.6%ALT: 26; AST: 72; TB: 13.6Hepatic damage: 78%; Liver-associated death: 1.2%; MV: 40.2%
Zhou et al[43]. China N = 191 (n = 54)52 vs 6959% vs 70%--ALT: 24% vs 48%ALT: 27 vs 40 ARDS: 7% vs 93%; Shock: 0% vs 70%; MV: 2% vs 100%3
Table 3 Reported data on critically ill, intensive care units, or severe coronavirus disease 2019 patients
Ref.
N (all), n (severe disease). Patient population
Age (year)
Male
Pre-existing CLD
Type of pre-existing CLD
Elevated LFTs on admission (%)
LFTs levels on admission. ALT/AST/ALP/GGT (U/L)/TB (μmoL)
Selected complications or clinical outcomes
Arentz et al[56]. United StatesN = 21. Critically ill7052%4.8%Cirrhosis -ALT: 108; AST: 273; ALP: 80; TB: 0.6 mg/dLALI: 14.3%; Severe ARDS: 57.1%; MV:71%; Death: 52.4%
Cai et al[34]. ChinaN = 318 (n = 85)1. Non-severe vs severe47. All patients47.5%. All patients 5%. All patientsALD, NAFLD, HVBALT: 6.4% vs 21.1%; AST: 0.68% vs 18.8%; GGT: 5.1% vs 29.4%; TB: 1.2% vs 7%-MOF: 0% vs 11.7%
Cai et al[9]. China N = 298 (n = 58). Non-severe vs severe41 vs 62.544.1% vs 67.2%8.3% vs 13.7%NAFLD: 3.3% vs 10.3%; ALD: 3.3% vs 1.7%; HBV: 1.7% vs 1.7%-ALT: 20 vs 26.8; AST: 26 vs 36; ALP: 61 vs 58; GGT: 21 vs 35.2; TB: 10.9 vs 11.2ALI: 9.6% vs 36.2%; Discharge: 93.3% vs 75.9%; Hospital-stay: 19 d vs 27 d; Death: 0% vs 5.2%
Du et al[57]. China N = 109. Non-ICU vs ICU72.7 vs 68.465.5% vs 70.6%3.4% vs 0%-ALT: 13.8% vs 19.6%; AST: 49% vs 43.1%ALT: 21.6 vs 27; AST: 32 vs 40Invasive MV: 0% vs 64.7%; Hospital-stay: 12.5 d vs 15.9 d
Guan et al[40]. China N = 1099 (n = 173). Non-severe vs severe45 vs 5258.2% vs 57.8%2.4% vs 0.6%HBVALT: 19.8% vs 28.1%; AST: 18.2% vs 39.4%; TB: 9.9% vs 13.3%-ARDS: 1.1% vs 15.6%; MV: 0% vs 38.7%; Discharge: 5.4% vs 2.9%; Hospital-stay: 11 d vs 13 d; Death: 0.1% vs 8.1%
Huang et al[2]. ChinaN = 41 (n = 13). Non-ICU vs ICU49 vs 4968% vs 85%4% vs 0%-AST: 25% vs 62%ALT: 27 vs 49; AST: 34 vs 44; TB: 10.8 vs 14 ARDS: 4% vs 85%; Shock: 0% vs 23%; Invasive MV: 0% vs 15%; Discharge: 75% vs 54%; Death: 4% vs 38%
Lei et al[28]. China N = 5771 (n = 1186). Non-severe vs severe55 vs 5945.1% vs 55.3%1.2% vs 2.1%Viral hepatitis Cirrhosis-ALT: 23 vs 26; AST: 22 vs 31; ALP: 65 vs 63; TB: 10.3 vs 10.6Reported as association not absolute values
Li et al[58]. China N = 548 (n = 269). Non-severe vs severe56 vs 6545.2% vs 56.9%1.1% vs 0.7%HBVALT: 22.3% vs 24.1%; AST: 23.3% vs 43.4%; TB: 2.3% vs 6.4%-ALI: 15.8% vs 23%; ARDS: 9.7% vs 68%; MV: 4% vs 34.2%2; Discharge: 72.9% vs 31.7%; Death: 1.1% vs 32.5%
Mo et al[59]. China N = 155 (n = 85)3. General vs refractory47 vs 6144.3% vs 64.7%2.9% vs 5.9%--ALT: 20 vs 28; AST: 32 vs 37Critical case: 4.3% vs 40%; MV: 0% vs 41.2%; Others reported as association
Wan et al[60]. China N = 135 (n =40). Mild vs severe44 vs 5654.7% vs 52.5%1% vs 2.5%-AST: 16% vs 37.5%ALT: 21.7 vs 26.6; AST: 22.4 vs 33.6; TB: 8.6 vs 9.8ARDS: 1.1% vs 50%; Shock: 0% vs 2.5%; Discharge: 10.5% vs 12.5%; Death: 0% vs 2.5%
Wang et al[1]. China N = 138 (n = 36). Non-ICU vs ICU51 vs 6652% vs 61.1%3.9% vs 0%--ALT: 23 vs 35; AST: 29 vs 52; TB: 9.3 vs 11.5ARDS: 4.9% vs 61.1%; Shock: 1% vs 30.6%; Invasive MV: 0% vs 47.2%
Wu et al[42]. China N = 201 (n = 84)4. Non-ARDS vs ARDS48 vs 58.558.1% vs 71.4%3.5%5--ALT: 27 vs 35; AST: 30 vs 38; TB: 10.5 vs 12.9MV: 0% vs 78.6%2; Others reported as association
Zhang et al[61]. China N = 221 (n = 55). Non-severe vs severe51 vs 6244% vs 63.6%1.8% vs 7.3%--ALT: 22 vs 32; AST: 27 vs 51; TB: 9.6 vs 11.4ARDS: 0% vs 87.3%; Shock: 0% vs 27.3%; MV: 1.2% vs 74.6%2; Discharge: 21.1% vs 12.7%; Death: 0% vs 21.8%
Zhang et al[62]. China N = 140 (n = 58). Non-severe vs severe51.1 vs 6446.3% vs 56.9%5% vs 6.9%Fatty liver and abnormal liver function---
Zheng et al[63]. China N = 161 (n = 30). Non-severe vs severe40 vs 5750.4% vs 46.7%3.1% vs 0%-ALT: 6.1% vs 16.7%; AST: 7.6% vs 40%; TB: 4.6% vs 10%ALT: 19.3 vs 23.9; AST: 23.4 vs 31.6; TB: 10.7 vs 12.7-
Table 4 Reported effects of selected coronavirus disease 2019 therapies on liver
Medication (class)
Pattern of liver injury
Evidence
Corticosteroids (Anti-inflammatory agent)Acute liver injury[77]Multicenter cohort study (n = 774); COVID-19 with ARDS: Incidence of ALI versus control (18.3% vs 9.9%; P = 0.001)[77]
Meta-analysis; critically ill COVID-19 patients: No association with serious adverse effects[78]
RECOVERY trial: No reported serious ADRs or DILI[79]
Favipiravir (RdRp inhibitor)Abnormal LFTs[80] RCT (n = 150); mild-to-moderate COVID-19: Abnormal LFTs versus control 6.8% vs 2.7%)[80]
Elevation of transaminases levels[81]RCT; moderate COVID-19: Elevated ALT and AST were reported[81]
Hydroxychloroquine (Antimalarial agent)Liver toxicity is not common[82]. Elevation of transaminases levels[74,75,82-84]Retrospective study (n = 153): Elevation in AST (11%) and ALT (9%)[82]
RCT (n = 504); mild-to-moderate COVID-19: Elevation in ALT or AST elevation 10.6% in HCQ plus azithromycin, 9% in HCQ, and 3.5% in control arm (P = 0.008)[83]
Systematic review: Elevations of LFTs was transient[84]
Recovery trial: No reported DILI[85]
Interferon -Data on safety in COVID-19 patients is scarce
Lopinavir/ritonavir (Protease inhibitor)Rise in liver function parameters[5,27,34,74,86]RCT (n = 199): Elevated AST versus control (2.1% vs 5.1%), elevated ALT (1.1% vs 1 %), elevated TB (3.2% vs 3 %)[86]
Hyperbilirubinemia[5,34]Meta-analysis: DILI in 37.2% of patients (as hyperbilirubinemia followed by elevation of transaminases)[5]
Remdesivir (RdRp inhibitor)Not well established. Elevation of transaminases levels[5,75,87-89]. Elevation of TB levels[88]. Hypoalbuminemia[88]Case series: Elevated aminotransferases in 23 % discontinuation in 4% of patients[87]
RCT (n = 237) in severe COVID-19: Elevated TB versus placebo (10% vs 9%) and AST (5% vs 12%), hypoalbuminemia (13% vs 15%). Discontinuation in 1% of patients[88]
Open-label, phase 3 trial: Elevated ALT (5%-6%) and AST (7%-8%)[89]
Meta-analysis: Pooled incidence of DILI of 15.2%[5]
Meta-analysis: No difference as compared to placebo in liver enzymes elevation[90]
Tocilizumab (Humanized recombinant monoclonal antibody)Elevation of transaminases levels[27,75,91-94]. Liver injury as early as 24 h with a 40-fold increase in transaminases that normalized in 10 d[91]Case series; 7 severe COVID-19 patients: Up to 4.5 folds elevated baseline ALT and AST. Transaminases normalized in 3 wk[92]
Retrospective study (n = 1827): AST > 5 × ULN in 69.1%, and ALT > 5 × ULN in 72.1% of patients[75]
Observational study (n = 104): Minor increase of AST, ALT (P < 0.001) and GGT (P = 0.003; no safety concerns on follow up[93]
RCT (n = 243): ALT elevation versus placebo (5% vs 4.9%), AST elevation in 3.7%[94]
RCT (n = 130); moderate or severe COVID-19: No increase in hepatitis risk[95]