Purpose of review We examine the latest research on the emerging bile acid-gut microbiome axis and its role in health and disease. Our focus revolves around two key microbial pathways for degrading bile salts, and the impact of bile acid composition in the gut on the gut microbiome and host physiology. Recent findings Bile acid pool size has recently been shown to be a function of microbial metabolism of bile acids in the intestines. Recent studies have shown potential mechanisms explaining how perturbations in the microbiome affect bile acid pool size and composition. Bile acids are emerging as regulators of the gut microbiome at the highest taxonomic levels. The role of bile acids as hormones and potentiators of liver cancer is also emerging. Summary The host and microbiome appear to regulate bile acid pool size. The host produces a large, conjugated hydrophilic bile acid pool, maintained through positive-feedback antagonism of farnesoid X receptor (FXR) in intestine and liver. Members of the microbiome utilize bile acids and their conjugates resulting in agonism of FXR in intestine and liver resulting in a smaller, unconjugated hydrophobic bile acid pool. Hydrophilicity of the bile acid pool is associated with disease states. Reduced bile acid levels in the gut are associated with bacterial overgrowth and inflammation. Diet, antibiotic therapy, and disease states affect the balance of the microbiome-bile acid pool.

Recurrent hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is a leading cause of readmission despite standard of care (SOC) associated with microbial dysbiosis. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) may improve dysbiosis; however, it has not been studied in HE. We aimed to define whether FMT using a rationally derived stool donor is safe in recurrent HE compared to SOC alone. An open‐label, randomized clinical trial with a 5‐month follow‐up in outpatient men with cirrhosis with recurrent HE on SOC was conducted with 1:1 randomization. FMT‐randomized patients received 5 days of broad‐spectrum antibiotic pretreatment, then a single FMT enema from the same donor with the optimal microbiota deficient in HE. Follow‐up occurred on days 5, 6, 12, 35, and 150 postrandomization. The primary outcome was safety of FMT compared to SOC using FMT‐related serious adverse events (SAEs). Secondary outcomes were adverse events, cognition, microbiota, and metabolomic changes. Participants in both arms were similar on all baseline criteria and were followed until study end. FMT with antibiotic pretreatment was well tolerated. Eight (80%) SOC participants had a total of 11 SAEs compared to 2 (20%) FMT participants with SAEs (both FMT unrelated; P = 0.02). Five SOC and no FMT participants developed further HE (P = 0.03). Cognition improved in the FMT, but not the SOC, group. Model for End‐Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score transiently worsened postantibiotics, but reverted to baseline post‐FMT. Postantibiotics, beneficial taxa, and microbial diversity reduction occurred with Proteobacteria expansion. However, FMT increased diversity and beneficial taxa. SOC microbiota and MELD score remained similar throughout. Conclusion: FMT from a rationally selected donor reduced hospitalizations, improved cognition, and dysbiosis in cirrhosis with recurrent HE. (Hepatology 2017;66:1727–1738)

Infections worsen survival in cirrhosis; however, simple predictors of survival in infection-related acute-on-chronic liver failure (I-ACLF) derived from multicenter studies are required in order to improve prognostication and resource allocation. Using the North American Consortium for Study of End-stage Liver Disease (NACSELD) database, data from 18 centers were collected for survival analysis of prospectively enrolled cirrhosis patients hospitalized with an infection. We defined organ failures as 1) shock, 2) grade III/IV hepatic encephalopathy (HE), 3) need for dialysis and mechanical ventilation. Determinants of survival with these organ failures were analyzed. In all, 507 patients were included (55 years, 52% hepatitis C virus [HCV], 15.8% nosocomial infection, 96% Child score ≥7) and 30-day evaluations were available in 453 patients. Urinary tract infection (UTI) (28.5%), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) (22.5%) were the most prevalent infections. During hospitalization, 55.7% developed HE, 17.6% shock, 15.1% required renal replacement, and 15.8% needed ventilation; 23% died within 30 days and 21.6% developed second infections. Admitted patients developed none (38.4%), one (37.3%), two (10.4%), three (10%), or four (4%) organ failures. The 30-day survival worsened with a higher number of extrahepatic organ failures, none (92%), one (72.6%), two (51.3%), three (36%), and all four (23%). I-ACLF was defined as ≥2 organ failures given the significant change in survival probability associated at this cutoff. Baseline independent predictors for development of ACLF were nosocomial infections, Model for Endstage Liver Disease (MELD) score, low mean arterial pressure (MAP), and non-SBP infections. Independent predictors of poor 30-day survival were I-ACLF, second infections, and admission values of high MELD, low MAP, high white blood count, and low albumin. Conclusion : Using multicenter study data in hospitalized decompensated infected cirrhosis patients, I-ACLF defined by the presence of two or more organ failures using simple definitions is predictive of poor survival. (Hepatology 2014;60:250–256)