Anticoagulation Favors Thrombus Recanalization and Survival in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis and Portal Vein Thrombosis: Results of a Meta-Analysis

Challenges and Opportunities of Direct Oral Anticoagulant (DOAC) Therapy in Complex Clinical Scenarios: A Comprehensive Review and Practical Guide

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as a preferred alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic disorders, offering improved safety, predictable pharmacokinetics, and ease of administration. Despite these advantages, their use in complex clinical scenarios presents significant challenges that necessitate individualized therapeutic strategies. This comprehensive review explores the efficacy, safety, and limitations of DOAC therapy in special populations, including patients with renal or hepatic impairment, obesity, cancer-associated thrombosis, and antiphospholipid syndrome. Additionally, we examine their role in uncommon thrombotic conditions such as superficial venous thrombosis, embolic stroke of undetermined source, upper extremity vein thrombosis, inferior vena cava thrombosis, pelvic vein thrombosis, and cerebral vein thrombosis. The pharmacokinetic variability of DOACs in renal and hepatic dysfunction requires caution to balance the bleeding and thrombotic risks. In obesity, altered drug distribution and metabolism raise concerns regarding appropriate dosing and therapeutic efficacy. Cancer-associated thrombosis presents a complex interplay of prothrombotic mechanisms, necessitating careful selection of anticoagulant therapy. Furthermore, the use of DOACs in antiphospholipid syndrome remains controversial due to concerns about recurrent thrombotic events. Finally, in some unusual scenarios like inferior vena cava, pelvic vein, and cerebral vein thrombosis, the use of DOACs has scarce evidence. This review aims to guide clinicians in optimizing anticoagulation management in challenging patient populations by synthesizing current evidence and providing practical recommendations.

Advancements of direct oral anticoagulants in cirrhotic individuals with portal vein thrombosis

Individuals with cirrhosis maintain a delicate balance between pro- and anticoagulation, which can lead to a state of hypercoagulability. This hypercoagulable condition not only exacerbates liver fibrosis but also increases the risk of venous thrombosis, particularly portal vein thrombosis (PVT). PVT has detrimental effects on liver function, complicates the success of liver transplantation, and negatively impacts the survival rate of patients with cirrhosis. Currently, multiple studies have confirmed that individuals with cirrhosis responded well to treatment with novel direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), showing both safety and efficacy. Furthermore, the use of DOACs as a preventive measure in patients with cirrhosis following surgery has been shown to lower the occurrence of portal vein thrombosis and postpone the progression of liver fibrosis.

The management of splanchnic vein thrombosis in acute pancreatitis: a global DELPHI consensus study

BACKGROUND

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SpVT) occurs in 17%-23 % of acute pancreatitis cases. Serious sequelae include hepatic and bowel ischaemia. However, management with therapeutic anticoagulation remains controversial due to potential bleeding risk. We aim to determine the level of consensus on prognosis, diagnosis, management, and outcomes of SpVT through a DELPHI process.

METHODS

Using purposive, non-probability sampling and DELPHI methodology, 173 clinicians with experience of SpVT in acute pancreatitis were approached. From April 2022 to April 2023, a three-round DELPHI process was implemented to completion. A total of 88 statements were posed for ranking via a four-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

The mean acute pancreatitis caseload per respondent per year was 68·0, 72·6 and 73·0 for DELPHI rounds 1,2 and 3 respectively. For SpVT anatomical location, there was strong consensus favouring anticoagulation for portal vein (89·1 %) and SMV thrombosis (90·9 %), and no consensus to treat splenic vein thrombosis (47·3 %). 74·1 % rejected radiological resolution as a definitive anticoagulation endpoint. Majority consensus favoured death, bleeding risk, bowel or liver ischaemia, hospital admission length and ITU admission as significant outcomes for experimental research design.

CONCLUSION

There was significant consensus for anticoagulation treatment of SpVT of the portal and superior mesenteric veins, especially with complete occlusion by thrombosis. Randomised controlled trials are required to grade management recommendations.

Coagulation Abnormalities in Chronic Liver Disease

Chronic liver disease is a frequently encountered disorder and a major concern worldwide with a complex pathophysiology, which often affects the hemostatic system. Such alterations, which affect both primary and secondary hemostasis, are heterogenous, including prohemorrhagic (i.e., decreased coagulation factors, increased fibrinolysis, thrombocytopenia, and platelet dysfunction) and prothrombotic (i.e., decreased natural anticoagulants) changes. As a consequence of this unstable balance, patients with liver cirrhosis may experience both hemorrhagic complications and venous thromboembolic events, which are often unpredictable and whose management is particularly challenging for clinicians. This narrative review will address the most recent advances in the pathophysiology of key derangements of hemostasis in patients with chronic liver disease, focusing on their clinical implications and management.

Administration of anticoagulation strategies for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: network meta-analysis

Objectives

Evidences for anticoagulation strategies in cirrhotic with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) are still insufficient. This study aims to comprehensively compare the therapeutic effects of different therapeutic therapeutic measures in individuals suffering from cirrhosis with PVT, with the ultimate goal of providing evidence-based recommendations for thrombolytic therapy in this population.

Methods

Starting from 20 October 2023, a comprehensive search about therapeutic strategies for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library.

Results

19 studies were eventually incorporated into this study. Comparison with control in network meta-analysis, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) (RR = 2.15, 95%CI: 1.33, 3.48), LMWH (RR = 1.41, 95%CI: 1.01, 1.99), TIPS (RR = 5.68, 95%CI: 2.63, 12.24), warfarin (RR = 2.16, 95%CI: 1.46, 3.21), EBL plus propranolol (RR = 2.80, 95%CI: 1.18, 6.60), LMWH-DOACs sequential (RR = 7.92, 95%CI: 2.85, 21.99) and LMWH-warfarin sequential (RR = 2.26, 95%CI: 1.16, 4.42) significantly improved the incidence of complete recanalization. The anticoagulation drugs were ranked based on their SUCRA values, with the LMWH-DOACs sequential (92.7%), TIPS plus warfarin (91.3%), and TIPS (80.3%) emerging as the top three effective treatments.

Conclusion

In this study, active anticoagulants were recommended for cirrhosis with PVT. The TIPS plus warfarin, LMWH-DOACs sequential, and TIPS improved the complete recanalization rate most effectively, and the EBL plus propranolol, heparin plus DOACs plus warfarin, and DOACs were highly recommended for increasing the incidence of partial recanalization. Warfarin and TIPS were recommended for reducing the frequency of bleeding events, while LMWH plus warfarin and DOACs proved to be most effective in decreasing the rate of major bleeding events. Warfarin, heparin plus DOACs plus warfarin, and DOACs demonstrated the most significant reduction in mortality rates, highlighting its potential as an effective intervention. TIPS plus warfarin, LMWH-DOACs sequential, and TIPS were recommended for reducing the occurrence of PVT expansion. Heparin plus DOACs plus warfarin was recommended for reducing the occurrence of hepatic encephalopathy, and protocols that involve TIPS were generally associated with a higher risk of hepatic encephalopathy. However, a longer follow-up period is necessary to comprehensively evaluate the efficacy of active anticoagulants therapy in patients with PVT in cirrhosis.

Portal hypertension: recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Consensus document sponsored by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) and the Biomedical Research Network Centre for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBERehd)

Portal hypertension is a hemodynamic abnormality that complicates the course of cirrhosis, as well as other diseases that affect the portal venous circulation. The development of portal hypertension compromises prognosis, especially when it rises above a certain threshold known as clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). In the consensus conference on Portal Hypertension promoted by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver and the Hepatic and Digestive diseases area of the Biomedical Research Networking Center (CIBERehd), different aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension caused by cirrhosis or other diseases were discussed. The outcome of this discussion was a set of recommendations that achieved varying degrees of consensus among panelists and are reflected in this consensus document. The six areas under discussion were: the relevance of CSPH and the non-invasive methods used for its diagnosis and that of cirrhosis, the prevention of the first episode of decompensation and its recurrence, the treatment of acute variceal bleeding and other complications of portal hypertension, the indications for the use of TIPS, and finally, the diagnosis and treatment of liver vascular diseases.

Portal hypertension: recommendations for diagnosis and treatment. Consensus document sponsored by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver (AEEH) and the Biomedical Research Network Center for Liver and Digestive Diseases (CIBERehd)

Portal hypertension is a hemodynamic abnormality that complicates the course of cirrhosis, as well as other diseases that affect the portal venous circulation. The development of portal hypertension compromises prognosis, especially when it rises above a certain threshold known as clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH). In the consensus conference on Portal Hypertension promoted by the Spanish Association for the Study of the Liver and the Hepatic and Digestive diseases area of the Biomedical Research Networking Center (CIBERehd), different aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension caused by cirrhosis or other diseases were discussed. The outcome of this discussion was a set of recommendations that achieved varying degrees of consensus among panelists and are reflected in this consensus document. The six areas under discussion were: the relevance of clinically significant portal hypertension and the non-invasive methods used for its diagnosis and that of cirrhosis, the prevention of the first episode of decompensation and its recurrence, the treatment of acute variceal bleeding and other complications of portal hypertension, the indications for the use of TIPS, and finally, the diagnosis and treatment of liver vascular diseases.

Management of Portal vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is one of the common complications of cirrhosis. The incidence of PVT correlates with liver disease severity-higher incidence in patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) C, large spontaneous portosystemic shunts, hepatofugal portal flow, and in the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma. PVT may worsen ascites, increase the risk and poor control of variceal bleeding. The occurrence of PVT may increase morbidity and lower survival after a liver transplant. Using statins prevents the occurrence of PVT, whereas beta-blockers may aggravate its occurrence. Cross-sectional imaging is mandatory for the precise diagnosis and classification of PVT. Symptomatic, occlusive PVT and candidacy for liver transplantation are the main indications for anticoagulation. Vitamin K antagonists, low-molecular-weight heparin, and newer anticoagulants are effective and safe in cirrhosis. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants are agents of choice in early cirrhosis (CTP A, B). The duration of anticoagulant therapy, predictors of response, and management of complications of cirrhosis while on therapy require in-depth knowledge and individualized treatment. Transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt can be considered in nonresponsive cases or when anticoagulants are contraindicated. This manuscript reviews the latest updated knowledge about managing PVT in cirrhosis.

Thrombotic, Cardiovascular, and Microvascular Complications of Myeloproliferative Neoplasms and Clonal Hematopoiesis (CHIP): A Narrative Review

The most common causes of morbidity and mortality in the myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), with the exception of myelofibrosis, are venous and arterial thrombosis, as well as more recently discovered cardiovascular disease (CVD). Clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP) is the subclinical finding in an individual of somatic mutations that are also found in clinically overt MPNs and other myeloid malignancies. The prevalence of "silent" CHIP increases with age. CHIP can transform into a clinically overt MPN at an estimated rate of 0.5 to 1% per year. It is likely, therefore, but not proven, that many, if not all, MPN patients had antecedent CHIP, possibly for many years. Moreover, both individuals with asymptomatic CHIP, as well as clinically diagnosed patients with MPN, can develop thrombotic complications. An unexpected and remarkable discovery during the last few years is that even CHIP (as well as MPNs) are significant, independent risk factors for CVD. This review discusses up-to-date information on the types of thrombotic and cardiovascular complications that are found in CHIP and MPN patients. A systemic inflammatory state (that is often subclinical) is most likely to be a major mediator of adverse reciprocal bone marrow-cardiovascular interplay that may fuel the development of progression of MPNs, including its thrombotic and vascular complications, as well as the worsening of cardiovascular disease, possibly in a "vicious cycle". Translating this to clinical practice for hematologists and oncologists who treat MPN patients, attention should now be paid to ensuring that cardiovascular risk factors are controlled and minimized, either by the patient's cardiologist or primary care physician or by the hematologist/oncologist herself or himself. This review is intended to cover the clinical aspects of thrombosis and cardiovascular complications in the MPN, accompanied by pathobiological comments.

Exploring the impact of inflammatory cytokines on alcoholic liver disease: a Mendelian randomization study with bioinformatics insights into potential biological mechanisms

Background: Alcoholic liver disease (ALD) significantly contributes to global morbidity and mortality. The role of inflammatory cytokines in alcohol-induced liver injury is pivotal yet not fully elucidated.Objectives: To establish a causal link between inflammatory cytokines and ALD using a Mendelian Randomization (MR) framework.Methods: This MR study utilized genome-wide significant variants as instrumental variables (IVs) for assessing the relationship between inflammatory cytokines and ALD risk, focusing on individuals of European descent. The approach was supported by comprehensive sensitivity analyses and augmented by bioinformatics tools including differential gene expression, protein-protein interactions (PPI), Gene Ontology (GO), Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis, and analysis of immune cell infiltration.Results: Our findings reveal that increased levels of stem cell growth factor beta (SCGF-β, beta = 0.141, p = .032) and interleukin-7 (IL-7, beta = 0.311, p = .002) are associated with heightened ALD risk, whereas higher levels of macrophage inflammatory protein-1α (MIP-1α, beta = -0.396, p = .004) and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF, beta = -0.628, p = .008) are linked to reduced risk. The sensitivity analyses support these robust causal relationships. Bioinformatics analyses around inflammatory cytokine-associated SNP loci suggest multiple pathways through which cytokines influence ALD.Conclusion: The genetic evidence from this study convincingly demonstrates that certain inflammatory cytokines play directional roles in ALD pathogenesis. These findings provide insights into the complex biological pathways involved and underscore the potential for developing targeted therapies that modulate these inflammatory responses, ultimately improving clinical outcomes for ALD patients.

Portal vein thrombosis: diagnosis, management, and endpoints for future clinical studies

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) refers to the development of a non-malignant obstruction of the portal vein, its branches, its radicles, or a combination. This Review first provides a comprehensive overview of all aspects of PVT, namely the specifics of the portal venous system, the risk factors for PVT, the pathophysiology of portal hypertension in PVT, the interest in non-invasive tests, as well as therapeutic approaches including the effect of treating risk factors for PVT or cause of cirrhosis, anticoagulation, portal vein recanalisation by interventional radiology, and prevention and management of variceal bleeding in patients with PVT. Specific issues are also addressed including portal cholangiopathy, mesenteric ischaemia and intestinal necrosis, quality of life, fertility, contraception and pregnancy, and PVT in children. This Review will then present endpoints for future clinical studies in PVT, both in patients with and without cirrhosis, agreed by a large panel of experts through a Delphi consensus process. These endpoints include classification of portal vein thrombus extension, classification of PVT evolution, timing of assessment of PVT, and global endpoints for studies on PVT including clinical outcomes. These endpoints will help homogenise studies on PVT and thus facilitate reporting, comparison between studies, and validation of future studies and trials on PVT.

Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis: The State-of-the-Art on Anticoagulant Treatment

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a rare type of venous thromboembolism occurring within the splanchnic venous system. Portal vein thrombosis is the most common presentation, while Budd-Chiari syndrome is the least common. Liver cirrhosis and abdominal solid cancer are the main local risk factors for SVT, whereas myeloproliferative neoplasms are the predominant systemic risk factors. Signs and symptoms of SVT are nonspecific and include abdominal pain, gastrointestinal bleeding, and ascites. Asymptomatic SVT is not uncommon, and the majority would be detected incidentally on routine abdominal imaging performed for the follow-up of liver diseases and tumors. The management of SVT aims to prevent thrombus progression, promote vessel recanalization, and prevent recurrent venous thromboembolism. Anticoagulation should be started early in order to increase the chances of vessel recanalization and reduce the risk of portal hypertension-related complications. Direct oral anticoagulants have been included in recent guidelines, as alternatives to vitamin K antagonists, after clinical stability has been reached; however, caution is required in patients with liver or kidney dysfunction. Treatment duration is based on the presence (or absence) and type (transient vs. permanent) of risk factors. This narrative review aims to summarize the latest evidence on SVT, with a particular focus on the anticoagulant treatment in special categories of patients (e.g., liver cirrhosis, solid cancer, myeloproliferative neoplasms, pancreatitis, incidentally detected SVT, Budd-Chiari syndrome, and chronic SVT).

Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis. Part 2: Treatment, Primary and Secondary Prevention

In most cases, portal vein thrombosis progresses without treatment; spontaneous recanalization of portal vein develops in 42 % of patients with liver cirrhosis. Effective treatment strategies include administration of anticoagulants, interventional procedures such as transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt or endovascular fibrinolysis. Anticoagulant therapy has certain difficulties in patients with liver cirrhosis due to the complex profile of hemostasis, a tendency to both hemorrhages and hypercoagulation. In addition to traditional anticoagulants (heparin preparations, fondaparinux, vitamin K antagonists), direct oral anticoagulants have been widely used in recent years for portal vein thrombosis. Previously, portal vein thrombosis was considered a contraindication to performing transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt, currently the method is often used to restore portal blood flow through the shunt and prevent repeated thrombosis. Endovascular fibrinolysis is still an option for specialized centers for «difficult» patients. In cases of increased risk of venous thromboembolism, patients with liver cirrhosis are recommended to be prevented with low-molecular-weight heparin or direct oral anticoagulants, but further studies should clarify their effectiveness in this aspect. The review highlights data on the features of therapy, primary and secondary prevention of portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis. Despite the existing clinical recommendations for management of patients with cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis, the choice of a particular strategy primarily depends on an individualized assessment of risks and benefits of each treatment method.

Analysis of factors related to recanalization of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of liver cirrhosis, yet there are fewer studies about predictors of PVT recanalization. We aimed to further explore the predictors of recanalization in cirrhotic PVT to facilitate accurate prediction of patients' clinical status and timely initiation of appropriate treatment and interventions. To further investigate the benefits and risks of anticoagulant therapy in cirrhotic PVT patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with cirrhotic PVT in our hospital between January 2016 and December 2022, The primary endpoint was to analyze predictors of PVT recanalization by COX regression. Others included bleeding rate, liver function, and mortality.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 82 patients, with 30 in the recanalization group and 52 in the non-recanalization group. Anticoagulation therapy was the only independent protective factor for portal vein thrombosis recanalization and the independent risk factors included massive ascites, history of splenectomy, Child-Pugh B/C class, and main trunk width of the portal vein. Anticoagulation therapy was associated with a significantly higher rate of PVT recanalization (75.9% vs. 20%, log-rank P < 0.001) and a lower rate of PVT progression (6.9% vs. 54.7%, log-rank P = 0.002). There was no significant difference between different anticoagulation regimens for PVT recanalization. Anticoagulation therapy did not increase the incidence of bleeding complications(P = 0.407). At the end of the study follow-up, Child-Pugh classification, MELD score, and albumin level were better in the anticoagulation group than in the non-anticoagulation group. There was no significant difference in 2-year survival between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Anticoagulation, massive ascites, history of splenectomy, Child-Pugh B/C class, and main portal vein width were associated with portal vein thrombosis recanalization. Anticoagulation may increase the rate of PVT recanalization and decrease the rate of PVT progression without increasing the rate of bleeding. Anticoagulation may be beneficial in improving liver function in patients with PVT in cirrhosis.

Systemic Thrombolysis for Isolated Splenic Vein Thrombosis Secondary to Oral Contraceptives: A Case Report

Isolated splenic vein thrombosis (ISVT) is a very rare venous thromboembolism in the absence of pancreatic diseases, which can cause acute abdominal pain and chronic left-side portal hypertension. Herein, we reported a 40-year-old female patient who developed ISVT after taking oral contraceptives. Anticoagulation with oral rivaroxaban was the first-line choice of therapy in this case. Since then, abdominal pain alleviated, but she did not achieve vessel recanalization. Thus, a 7-day systemic thrombolysis with urokinase was given. Abdominal pain disappeared, but ISVT was not significantly improved. During follow-up period, long-term anticoagulation with oral rivaroxaban was given. Collectively, this case indicates the possibility of oral contraceptives as a risk factor of ISVT as well as anticoagulation combined with systemic thrombolysis as a choice of treatment for ISVT. Certainly, long-term follow-up is necessary in this case.

Effectiveness of edoxaban in portal vein thrombosis associated with liver cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) worsens the long-term prognosis of patients with cirrhosis; however, the optimal treatment remains to be determined. Reports on the efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants are increasing, and further evidence is needed. Therefore, we investigated the effectiveness of treatment with edoxaban in patients with PVT. We retrospectively reviewed the outcomes of edoxaban and warfarin as antithrombotic therapies for PVT. The median overall survival time was 4.2 years in patients with PVT, with a 1-year survival rate of 70.7% and a 5-year survival rate of 47.9%. The leading cause of death was hepatocellular carcinoma. The overall response rate for thrombolysis in the edoxaban group was 76.7% compared to 29.4% in the warfarin group, and edoxaban significantly improved PVT compared to warfarin. In addition, edoxaban provided long-term improvement of PVT. Warfarin, on the other hand, was temporarily effective but did not provide long-term benefits. The Child-Pugh and albumin-bilirubin scores did not change after edoxaban or warfarin use. No deaths occurred due to adverse events associated with edoxaban or warfarin. Edoxaban as a single agent can achieve long-term recanalization without compromising the hepatic reserves. Edoxaban is easy to initiate, even in an outpatient setting, and could become a major therapeutic agent for the treatment of PVT.

Case report: Rapid development of acute symptomatic portal vein system thrombosis after endoscopic variceal therapy in a patient with liver cirrhosis

Acute portal vein thrombosis (PVST), a serious complication of liver cirrhosis, is characterized as abdominal pain secondary to intestinal ischemia, and even intestinal necrosis. Anticoagulation is recommended for the treatment of acute PVST, but is often postponed in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding or those at a high risk of variceal bleeding. Herein, we reported a 63-year-old male with a 14-year history of alcoholic liver cirrhosis who developed progressive abdominal pain related to acute portal vein and superior mesenteric vein thrombosis immediately after endoscopic variceal ligation combined with endoscopic cyanoacrylate glue injection for acute variceal bleeding. Fortunately, acute PVST was successfully recanalized by the use of low molecular weight heparin. Collectively, this case suggests that acute symptomatic PVST can be secondary to endoscopic variceal therapy in liver cirrhosis, and can be safely and successfully treated by anticoagulation.

Endoportal Radiofrequency Ablation and Stent Placement in Patients with Portal Vein Tumor Thrombosis from Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Study on Feasibility and Safety

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common type of liver cancer, with 10-40% of cases involving portal vein tumor thrombosis (PVTT), leading to poor outcomes and a short survival. The effectiveness of PVTT treatment in patients with HCC is still controversial. Methods: This prospective dual-center study cohort comprised 60 patients with HCC and PVTT who underwent PVR-EPRFA-ST using a novel intravascular radiofrequency system followed by vascular stent placement across the PVTT stenosed segment under fluoroscopy guidance. Results: PVR-EPRFA-ST was technically and clinically successful in 54/60 (90%) and 37/54 (68.5%) patients, respectively. The mean tumor size, PVTT length, post-ablation luminal diameter, and median duration of the recanalized PV patency were 8.6 ± 3.4 cm, 4.1 ± 2.1 cm, 10.3 ± 1.8 mm, and 13.4 months. Higher technical and clinical success rates were associated with a longer survival (177 ± 17.3 days, HR: 0.3, 95%CI 0.12-0.71, p = 0.04; and 233 ± 18.3 days, HR: 0.14, 0.07-0.27, p < 0.001). A shorter survival was associated with Child-Pugh C (HR: 2.7, p = 0.04), multiple tumors (HR: 1.81, p = 0.03), and PVTT length (HR: 1.16, p = 0.04). Conclusions: PVR-EPRFA-ST was feasible and effective for the treatment of selected patients with PVTT, especially in patients with Child-Pugh A/B, single tumors, or a shorter PVTT length.

Management of Nonmalignant Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

Nonmalignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of cirrhosis especially at the stage of decompensations. The diagnosis of PVT in cirrhosis is often incidental and it may be detected during routine semestral abdominal ultrasound with Doppler during screening for hepatocellular carcinoma or during hospitalization for decompensated cirrhosis. After detection of PVT on abdominal ultrasound, it is important to evaluate patients with cross-sectional imaging to determine the age of thrombus, whether acute or chronic, the extent and degree of luminal occlusion of the portal vein, and to rule out hepatocellular carcinoma or other underlying malignancy. Factors influencing management include the degree and extent of luminal occlusion of PVT, potential listing for liver transplantation, and portal hypertension (PHT) complications such as variceal hemorrhage and refractory ascites, severity of thrombocytopenia, and other comorbidities including chronic kidney disease. Anticoagulation is the most common therapeutic option and it is specially indicated in patients who are candidates for liver transplantation. Interventional procedures including transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement and mechanical thrombectomy may be used on a case-by-case basis in patients with contraindications or adverse events related to anticoagulation, who develop worsening PVT while on anticoagulant therapy, or have chronic PVT and PHT complications that are not manageable medically or endoscopically.

How to manage splanchnic vein thrombosis in patients with liver disease

Liver cirrhosis and splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) are strictly correlated. Portal vein thrombosis, the most common location of SVT, is frequently diagnosed in liver cirrhosis (pooled incidence 4.6 per 100 patient-years), and liver cirrhosis is a common risk factor for SVT (reported in 24%-28% of SVT patients). In cirrhosis-associated SVT, anticoagulant treatment reduces mortality rates, thrombosis extension, and major bleeding, and increases the rates of recanalization, compared to no treatment. Achieving vessel recanalization improves the prognosis of cirrhotic patients by reducing liver-related complications (such as variceal bleeding, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy). Anticoagulation should be therefore routinely prescribed to cirrhotic patients with acute SVT unless contraindicated by active bleeding associated with hemodynamic impairment or by excessively high bleeding risk. Of note, early treatment is associated with higher probability of achieving vessel recanalization. The standard treatment consists of low-molecular-weight heparin, followed by oral anticoagulants (eg, vitamin K antagonists or direct oral anticoagulants), if not contraindicated by severe liver dysfunction. Cirrhotic patients with SVT should be treated long-term (especially if candidate for liver transplantation) since liver cirrhosis is a persistent risk factor for recurrent thrombosis. In this review, we discuss the management of SVT in patients with liver cirrhosis, with a focus on the anticoagulant treatment in terms of indications, timing, drugs, duration, and particular scenarios, such as gastroesophageal varices and thrombocytopenia.

Risk of Bleeding in Liver Cirrhosis Receiving Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

 Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are effective for the management of thromboembolic disorders. However, bleeding remains a major concern in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs.

METHODS

 PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The incidence of bleeding episodes in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs was pooled. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to compare the incidence of bleeding episodes in cirrhotic patients who received DOACs versus those who received conventional anticoagulants and did not receive anticoagulants.

RESULTS

 Twenty-nine studies were included. All bleeding, major bleeding, fatal bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage episodes were observed in 310/2,469, 100/1,388, 2/611, 166/1,886, and 5/1,147 cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs, respectively. Their pooled incidences were 13, 6, 0, 8, and 0%, respectively. They became higher in subgroup analyses of studies with advanced age, a longer treatment duration, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C. Compared with conventional anticoagulants, DOACs were associated with lower incidences of all bleeding (OR = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.52-0.98) and major bleeding (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.37-0.83) in cirrhotic patients, but not those of fatal bleeding (OR = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.04-1.28), gastrointestinal bleeding (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.52-1.17), or intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.12-1.12). The incidences of all bleeding (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.22-4.79) and major bleeding (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.26-3.61) did not significantly differ between cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) who received DOACs and those who did not receive anticoagulants.

CONCLUSION

 DOACs carry a low risk of bleeding in liver cirrhosis. Age, treatment duration, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh class may be associated with bleeding in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs. The risk of bleeding is not increased by DOACs in cirrhotic patients with PVT.

Understanding the pathogenesis of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: We are still on the way

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of liver cirrhosis. In this issue of theJournal of Clinical Ultrasound: Sonography and other Imaging Techniques, a systematic review and meta‐analysis by Giri et al assessed the role of portal system hemodynamics for predicting the presence and development of PVT in liver cirrhosis.

Anticoagulation therapy for portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent complication of cirrhosis, which is significantly associated with progressive hepatic decompensation such as ascites and a high mortality risk. Anticoagulation may associate with higher PVT regression rates, but the safety of anticoagulation should be considered.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation therapy for PVT in patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of cirrhotic patients diagnosed with PVT from January 2018 to December 2021, comparing those who received anticoagulation therapy to those who did not. Thirty-two patients received low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), warfarin, or rivaroxaban (anticoagulation group), and 52 were untreated (non-anticoagulation group). All patients were followed to assess the evolution of PVT (thrombus regression, stable, and progression) and the adverse effects of anticoagulation therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were followed for a median 13 mo (IQR: 6-24 mo). Thirty-two patients (38.1%) received anticoagulation therapy. Anticoagulation therapy was associated with a higher PVT regression rate (50.0% vs 23.1%, P = 0.010) (univariable hazard ratio [HR] for regression of PVT with anticoagulation = 0.300, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.116-0.773, P = 0.013; multivariable HR for regression of PVT with anticoagulation = 0.185, 95%CI: 0.061-0.560, P = 0.003). Anticoagulation therapy was stopped in six patients because of adverse effects, of which two were due to abdominal pain, two due to gastrointestinal bleeding, and two due to hematuria. Symptoms improved after drug withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support anticoagulation therapy in cirrhotic patients with non-malignant PVT, since anticoagulation seems safe and associated with superior PVT regression rates.

Anticoagulation improves survival in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis: The IMPORTAL competing-risk meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Previous meta-analyses demonstrated the safety and efficacy of anticoagulation in the recanalization of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis. Whether this benefit translates into improved survival is unknown. We conducted an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis to assess the effect of anticoagulation on all-cause mortality in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis.

METHODS

In this IPD meta-analysis, we selected studies comparing anticoagulation vs. no treatment in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases (until June 2020) (PROSPERO no.: CRD42020140026). IPD were subsequently requested from authors. The primary outcome - the effect of anticoagulation on all-cause mortality - was assessed by a one-step meta-analysis based on a competing-risk model with liver transplantation as the competing event. The model was adjusted for clinically relevant confounders. A multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to determine the effect of anticoagulation on recanalization.

RESULTS

Individual data on 500 patients from five studies were included; 205 (41%) received anticoagulation and 295 did not. Anticoagulation reduced all-cause mortality (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio 0.59; 95% CI 0.49-0.70), independently of thrombosis severity and recanalization. The effect of anticoagulation on all-cause mortality was consistent with a reduction in liver-related mortality. The recanalization rate was higher in the anticoagulation arm (adjusted odds ratio 3.45; 95% CI 2.22-5.36). The non-portal-hypertension-related bleeding rate was significantly greater in the anticoagulation group.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulation reduces all-cause mortality in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis independently of recanalization, but at the expense of increasing non-portal hypertension-related bleeding.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020140026.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

Anticoagulation is effective in promoting recanalization of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis, but whether this benefit translates into improved survival is controversial. Our individual patient data meta-analysis based on a competing-risk model with liver transplantation as the competing event shows that anticoagulation reduces all-cause mortality in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis independently of recanalization. According to our findings, portal vein thrombosis may identify a group of patients with cirrhosis that benefit from long-term anticoagulation.

Bleeding and Thrombotic Complications in Patients With Cirrhosis: A State-of-the-Art Appraisal

Much has evolved over the past 25 years regarding our understanding of the coagulopathy of liver disease. Paradoxically, this form of coagulopathy is relatively hypercoagulability despite the common clinical impression of a hemorrhagic tendency. The latter is largely driven by portal-mesenteric venous pressure (ie, portal hypertension) and has little to do with hemostatic pathways. It cannot be emphasized enough that the INR does not offer a meaningful measure in this situation and may lead to interventions such as fresh frozen plasma that can actually worsen portal pressure and hence pressure-driven bleeding. With regard to procedure-related bleeding, we point out substantial differences in the definition of high-risk procedures and propose a new operational definition dependent on the applicability of local hemostatic measures, although this requires further investigation. The common occurrence of venous thrombosis in these patients requires careful consideration of hemostatic pathways and overall risk and benefit of intervention. The decision regarding anticoagulation therapy needs to be driven not only by a global assessment including history of non-portal hypertensive-related bleeding, but also by fall risk which can result in head trauma in patients prone to encephalopathy. This is probably best estimated by frailty but has yet to be adequately investigated. In the background of these concerns, several superimposed and complex conditions including infections and renal dysfunction should be taken into account. Inherited forms of thrombophilia in the setting of cirrhosis perhaps do not outweigh the thrombophilia inherent to liver disease but warrant further consideration.

Safety of anticoagulation use for treatment of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis and its effect on hospital-based outcomes: an insight from a US nationwide database

Background and aim

Anticoagulation use for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with advanced liver disease is controversial. We investigated the effect of anticoagulation on outcomes in patients with PVT with cirrhosis.

Methods

We reviewed National Inpatient Sample data from 2016 to 2018 to identify patients with PVT. Our outcomes were in-hospital mortality, variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, acute kidney injury (AKI), hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), sepsis and hospital resource utilisation.

Results

We included 60 505 patients with PVT, out of whom 6.63% (4015) were on anticoagulation. The overall mortality in the anticoagulation group was 2.12% compared with 9.72% in the no anticoagulation group. The adjusted odds of mortality were low in the anticoagulation group (adjusted OR (AOR) 0.27, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.46, p&lt;0.001). Patients on anticoagulation had 29% lower odds of variceal bleeding (AOR 0.71, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.96, p=0.03). Lower odds of HRS (AOR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.85, p=0.01) and AKI (AOR 0.57, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.69, p&lt;0.001) were also seen in the anticoagulation group. Patients in the anticoagulation group also showed lower odds of SBP (AOR 0.62, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89, p=0.01) and sepsis (AOR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.93, p=0.03). Anticoagulation use resulted in shorter hospital stay by 1.15 days (adjusted length of stay −1.15, 95% CI −1.51 to –0.79, p&lt;0.001). The mean difference in total hospital charges between the anticoagulation and the no anticoagulation group was −$20 034 (95% CI −$27 077 to −$12 991, p&lt;0.001).

Conclusion

Our analysis found that anticoagulation use is safe and associated with better outcomes in patients with PVT with advanced liver disease.

Anticoagulation in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: Friend or Foe?

Concepts regarding the status of the coagulation process in cirrhosis are rapidly changing. Instead of a disease defined by excessive bleeding risk, recent studies have shown cirrhosis to be associated with a fragile state of rebalanced hemostasis, easily swayed in either direction, thrombosis, or bleeding. These findings, combined with the ever-growing population of patients with cirrhosis with an indication for anticoagulation (AC) and the emergence of the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease epidemic, have prompted a reexamination of the use of AC in patients with cirrhosis, either as a treatment for a concurrent thrombotic disorder or even as a possible therapeutic option that could influence the natural course of the disease and its complications. In recent years, a significant number of studies have been formulated to evaluate these possibilities. These studies evaluated, among others, the efficacy and safety of AC in thrombotic disorders or thrombotic complications of cirrhosis, its effect on survival, and the class of anticoagulants which is more suitable for patients with cirrhosis, depending on disease severity. This review examines recent studies investigating the use of AC in patients with cirrhosis and attempts to provide a simple guide for clinicians regarding the use of AC in patients with cirrhosis and its potential risks and benefits.

Anticoagulant therapy for splanchnic vein thrombosis: recent updates for patients with liver cirrhosis

INTRODUCTION

Liver cirrhosis is accompanied by several hemostatic alterations, which contribute to the current theory of "rebalanced hemostasis." Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a frequent complication of liver cirrhosis (17-26% of the cirrhotic patients), and liver cirrhosis is a common risk factor for SVT (24-28% of SVT cases).

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review aims to describe the current state of the art on the anticoagulant treatment of cirrhotic SVT, with a particular focus on the possible role of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and recent guidelines on this topic.

EXPERT OPINION

Early anticoagulant therapy is recommended in cirrhotic patients with acute SVT, to obtain vessel recanalization and decrease the rates of portal hypertension-related complications. Gastroesophageal varices do not represent a contraindication to anticoagulation, if adequate prophylaxis of variceal bleeding is established, and varices band ligation can be safely performed without the need to stop the anticoagulant treatment. The conventional treatment of cirrhotic SVT consisted of low molecular weight heparin, as initial treatment of choice, eventually followed by vitamin K antagonists, but the DOACs can be considered as a reasonable alternative in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.

Efficacy and safety of thrombolytic therapy for portal venous system thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of thrombolytic therapy in patients with portal venous system thrombosis (PVST) remains ambiguous. This study aimed to systematically collect available evidence and evaluate the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis for PVST.

METHODS

Eligible studies were searched via PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Among the cohort studies, meta-analyses were performed to assess the outcomes of PVST patients receiving thrombolysis. Pooled proportions were calculated. Among the case reports and case series, logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the risk factors for outcomes of PVST patients receiving thrombolysis. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Among the 2134 papers initially identified, 29 cohort studies and 131 case reports or case series were included. Based on the cohort studies, the pooled rates of overall response to thrombolytic therapy, complete recanalization of PVST, bleeding events during thrombolysis, further bowel resection, thrombosis recurrence, and 30-day mortality were 93%, 58%, 18%, 3%, 1%, and 4%, respectively. Based on the case reports and case series, acute pancreatitis (OR = 0.084), history of liver transplantation (OR = 13.346), and interval between onset of symptoms and initiation of thrombolysis ≤14 days (OR = 3.105) were significantly associated with complete recanalization of PVST; acute pancreatitis (OR = 6.556) was significantly associated with further bowel resection; but no factors associated with the overall response to thrombolytic therapy, bleeding events during thrombolysis, thrombosis recurrence, and 30-day mortality were identified or could be calculated.

CONCLUSION

Early initiation of thrombolysis should be effective for the treatment of PVST. But its benefits for PVST secondary to acute pancreatitis are weakened.

Safety, efficacy and prognosis of anticoagulant therapy for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The role of anticoagulants in the treatment of cirrhotic PVT remains controversial. This study aimed to analyze the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant therapy in patients with cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and its impact on prognosis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted for PVT patients with liver cirrhosis in our hospital. The primary outcome of the study was the PVT recanalization rate. Other outcomes included bleeding rate, liver function, and mortality. Cox and Logistic regression were used to explore the risk factors of outcomes.

RESULTS

This study included 77 patients that 27 patients in the anticoagulant group and 50 in the non-anticoagulant group. Anticoagulant therapy was associated with higher rate of PVT recanalization (44.4% vs 20.0%, log-rank P = 0.016) and lower rate of PVT progression (7.4% vs 30.0%, log-rank P = 0.026), and without increasing the rate of total bleeding (14.8% vs 24%, P = 0.343), major bleeding (3.7% vs 6%, P = 0.665) and variceal bleeding (3.7% vs 16%, P = 0.109). The safety and efficacy of different anticoagulants were similar. The Child-Pugh grade of the anticoagulant therapy group was better than that of the non-anticoagulant therapy group (P = 0.030). There was no significant difference in the 2-year survival rate of the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Anticoagulants could increase the PVT recanalization rate and reduce the PVT progression rate without increasing the rate of bleeding. Anticoagulants may be beneficial to improving the liver function of patients with cirrhotic PVT. There was no significant difference in the safety and efficacy of different anticoagulants in the treatment of cirrhotic PVT.

Improving Management of Portal Hypertension: The Potential Benefit of Non-Etiological Therapies in Cirrhosis

Portal hypertension is the consequence of cirrhosis and results from increased sinusoidal vascular resistance and hepatic blood inflow. Etiological therapies represent the first intervention to prevent a significant increase in portal pressure due to chronic liver damage. However, other superimposed pathophysiological drivers may worsen liver disease, including inflammation, bacterial translocation, endothelial dysfunction, and hyperactivation of hemostasis. These mechanisms can be targeted by a specific class of drugs already used in clinical practice. Albumin, rifaximin, statins, aspirin, and anticoagulants have been tested in cirrhosis and were a topic of discussion in the last Baveno consensus as non-etiological therapies. Based on the pathogenesis of portal hypertension in cirrhosis, our review summarizes the main mechanisms targeted by these drugs as well as the clinical evidence that considers them a valid complementary option to manage patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

Anticoagulation Therapy for Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis Associated With Acute Pancreatitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is not rare in patients with acute pancreatitis. It remains unclear about whether anticoagulation should be given for acute pancreatitis-associated SVT. The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Rates of SVT recanalization, any bleeding, death, intestinal ischemia, portal cavernoma, and gastroesophageal varices were pooled and compared between patients with acute pancreatitis-associated SVT who received and did not receive therapeutic anticoagulation. Pooled rates and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity among studies was evaluated. Overall, 16 studies including 698 patients with acute pancreatitis-associated SVT were eligible. After therapeutic anticoagulation, the pooled rates of SVT recanalization, any bleeding, death, intestinal ischemia, portal cavernoma, and gastroesophageal varices were 44.3% (95%CI = 32.3%-56.6%), 10.7% (95%CI = 4.9%-18.5%), 13.3% (95%CI = 6.9%-21.4%), 16.8% (95%CI = 6.9%-29.9%), 21.2% (95%CI = 7.5%-39.5%), and 29.1% (95%CI = 16.1%-44.1%), respectively. Anticoagulation therapy significantly increased the rate of SVT recanalization (RR = 1.69; 95%CI = 1.29-2.19; P < .01), and marginally increased the risk of bleeding (RR = 1.98; 95%CI = 0.93-4.22; P = .07). The rates of death (RR = 1.42; 95%CI = 0.62-3.25; P = .40), intestinal ischemia (RR = 2.55; 95%CI = 0.23-28.16; P = .45), portal cavernoma (RR = 0.51; 95%CI = 0.21-1.22; P = .13), and gastroesophageal varices (RR = 0.71; 95%CI = 0.38-1.32; P = .28) were not significantly different between patients who received and did not receive anticoagulation therapy. Heterogeneity was statistically significant in the meta-analysis of intestinal ischemia, but not in those of SVT recanalization, any bleeding, death, portal cavernoma, or gastroesophageal varices. Anticoagulation may be effective for recanalization of acute pancreatitis-associated SVT, but cannot improve the survival. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to further investigate the clinical significance of anticoagulation therapy in such patients.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in Chronic Portal Vein Thrombosis-From Routine Recommendations to Demanding Scenarios

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT), particularly the presence of portal cavernoma, was traditionally considered a relative contraindication for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting (TIPS) due to the technical difficulties in accessing and maneuvering the portal vein and avoiding the high risk for bleeding periportal collaterals. However, the last decade has seen a surge in the number of studies-mostly case reports and small series of patients-demonstrating that TIPS is not only technically feasible in the vast majority of these patients but also provides effective and long-term control of symptoms associated with portal hypertension in cases refractory to the standard line of therapy. The present article aims to provide a concise but exhaustive overview of the role and the standard and technically difficult TIPS placement scenarios in patients with chronic non-malignant PVT and with and without underlying liver disease. The review is strategically punctuated by exemplary instances from the authors' experience.

Portal Vein Thrombosis in the Setting of Cirrhosis: A Comprehensive Review

Portal vein thrombosis constitutes the most common thrombotic event in patients with cirrhosis, with increased rates in the setting of advanced liver disease. Despite being a well-known complication of cirrhosis, the contribution of portal vein thrombosis to hepatic decompensation and overall mortality is still a matter of debate. The incorporation of direct oral anticoagulants and new radiological techniques for portal vein recanalization have expanded our therapeutic arsenal. However, the lack of large prospective observational studies and randomized trials explain the heterogenous diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations of current guidelines. This article seeks to make a comprehensive review of the pathophysiology, clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis.

Epidemiology of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) may be associated with negative outcomes in patients with liver cirrhosis. However, the prevalence and incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis are heterogeneous among studies and have not been sufficiently determined yet.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Eligible studies would explore the prevalence and/or incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis without hepatocellular carcinoma or abdominal surgery. Pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using a random-effect model. Factors associated with the presence/occurrence of PVT were also extracted.

RESULTS

Among the 8549 papers initially identified, 74 were included. Fifty-four studies explored the prevalence of PVT in liver cirrhosis with a pooled prevalence of 13.92% (95%CI=11.18-16.91%). Based on cross-sectional data, Child-Pugh class B/C, higher D-dimer, ascites, and use of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) were associated with the presence of PVT in liver cirrhosis. Twenty-three studies explored the incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis with a pooled incidence of 10.42% (95%CI=8.16-12.92%). Based on cohort data, Child-Pugh class B/C, higher model of end-stage liver disease score, higher D-dimer, lower platelets count, decreased portal flow velocity, ascites, use of NSBBs, and moderate or high-risk esophageal varices could predict the occurrence of PVT in liver cirrhosis.

CONCLUSION

Approximately one seventh of cirrhotic patients have PVT, and one tenth will develop PVT. Progression of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension seems to be in parallel with the risk of PVT. Prospective studies with detailed information about classification and extension of PVT in liver cirrhosis are needed.

Successful treatment of acute symptomatic extensive portal venous system thrombosis by 7-day systemic thrombolysis

Acute portal venous system thrombosis (PVST) can cause acute mesenteric ischemia and even intestinal infarction, which are potentially fatal, and requires recanalization in a timely fashion. Herein, we report a 56-year-old man with acute non-cirrhotic symptomatic extensive PVST who achieved portal vein recanalization after systemic thrombolysis combined with anticoagulation. Initially, anticoagulation with enoxaparin sodium for 4 d was ineffective, and then systemic thrombolysis for 7 d was added. After that, his abdominal pain completely disappeared, and portal vein system vessels became gradually patent. Long-term anticoagulation therapy was maintained. In conclusion, 7-d systemic thrombolysis may be an effective and safe choice of treatment for acute symptomatic extensive PVST which does not respond to anticoagulation therapy.

Clinical predictors for thrombus progression in cirrhotic patients with untreated splanchnic vein thrombosis

INTRODUCTION

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) occurs in a heterogenous group of patients secondary to a variety of risk factors including liver disease. Minimal data regarding natural history and outcomes of SVT exists to inform management decisions. As such, there is equipoise regarding the utility of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with SVT. We sought to identify clinical factors predictive of new or progressive thrombosis in a cohort of patients with untreated SVT.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of cirrhotic patients over 18 years of age diagnosed with SVT at the Oregon Health & Science University from 2015 to 2020, excluding those initially treated with anticoagulation. The primary study endpoint was a composite of the following: imaging-confirmed progression of SVT, development of cavernous transformation, intestinal ischemia, portal cholangiopathy or new venous or arterial thrombosis.

RESULTS

261 patients were included in the analysis (median age 61 years, 68% male, 32% female). Forty percent of all patients experienced the primary composite endpoint. Multivariable logistic regression found that only the presence of pancreatitis or abdominal infection at diagnosis was associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing thrombus progression in patients with untreated SVT (OR 3.61, P = 0.02). There was a statistically significant overall survival difference between patients that did and did not experience the primary composite endpoint after controlling for confounding variables. (p = 0.0068).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, only the presence of pancreatitis or intrabdominal infection were found to be significantly associated with thrombotic progression, with varices identified as marginally non-significant risk factor. Notably, thrombotic progression was associated with a significant reduction in overall survival.

Anticoagulation in Cirrhosis: Evidence for the Treatment of Portal Vein Thrombosis and Applications for Prophylactic Therapy

The clinical utility of anticoagulation for patients with cirrhosis and asymptomatic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is widely debated. Complex hemostatic derangements in cirrhosis that increase risk of both bleeding and thrombosis, as well as a lack of randomized controlled data, limit conclusive assessments regarding optimal management of anticoagulation in this setting. In this review, we summarize the relevant literature pertaining to PVT in cirrhosis, including the effect of untreated PVT on the natural progression of liver disease and the overall impact of anticoagulation on clot burden and other relevant clinical outcomes. Apart from patients who are symptomatic or listed for liver transplantation, data supporting anticoagulation for the treatment of PVT is limited and without clear consensus guidelines. In patients with cirrhosis without PVT, emerging evidence for the role of prophylactic anticoagulation to mitigate the progression of fibrosis suggests an optimal risk-benefit tradeoff with decreased rates of liver decompensation and mortality, without a heightened risk of bleeding. In summation, as our understanding of the role of both prophylactic and therapeutic anticoagulation in cirrhosis continues to evolve, ongoing risk stratification of patients with asymptomatic PVT demands further attention.

Association of endoscopic variceal treatment with portal venous system thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

The association of endoscopic variceal treatment (EVT) with portal venous system thrombosis (PVST) in liver cirrhosis is still unclear.

METHODS

PVST was assessed by contrast-enhanced CT or MRI in 406 cirrhotic patients from our prospective database. Case and control groups, which are defined as patients with and without PVST, respectively, were matched at a ratio of 1:1 according to age, gender, Child-Pugh class, and MELD score. History of EVT was reviewed. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors for PVST. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. Subgroup analyses were further performed in terms of degree and location of PVST.

RESULTS

Overall, 109 patients each were included in case and control groups. The case group had a significantly higher proportion of patients who had undergone EVT than the control group (53.2% versus 18.3%; p < 0.001). In detail, the case group had significantly higher proportions of patients who had undergone EVT for controlling bleeding (45.9% versus 14.7%; p < 0.001), endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) alone (19.3% versus 9.2%; p = 0.033), and EVL combined with endoscopic cyanoacrylate glue injection (24.8% versus 5.5%; p < 0.001). EVT was independently associated with PVST (OR = 4.258; p < 0.001). In subgroup analyses, EVT remained independently associated with partial PVST (OR = 10.063; p < 0.001), complete PVST/fibrotic cord (OR = 4.889; p = 0.008), thrombosis within main portal vein (OR = 5.985; p < 0.001), and thrombosis within superior mesenteric and splenic veins (OR = 5.747; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

EVT may lead to a higher risk of PVST, especially more severe PVST, in liver cirrhosis. Screening for and prophylaxis of PVST after EVT should be further explored.

Direct oral anticoagulant administration in cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis: What is the evidence?

In recent years, the traditional concept that cirrhosis-related coagulopathy is an acquired bleeding disorder has evolved. Currently, it is known that in cirrhotic patients, the hemostatic system is rebalanced, which involves coagulation factors, fibrinolysis and platelets. These alterations disrupt homeostasis, skewing it toward a procoagulant state, which can lead to thromboembolic manifestations, especially when hemodynamic and endothelial factors co-occur, such as in the portal vein system in cirrhosis. Portal vein thrombosis is a common complication of advanced liver cirrhosis that negatively affects the course of liver disease, prognosis of cirrhotic patients and success of liver transplantation. It is still debated whether portal vein thrombosis is the cause or the consequence of worsening liver function. Anticoagulant therapy is the mainstay treatment for acute symptomatic portal vein thrombosis. In chronic portal vein thrombosis, the role of anticoagulant therapy is still unclear. Traditional anticoagulants, vitamin K antagonists and low-molecular-weight heparin are standard-of-care treatments for portal vein thrombosis. In the last ten years, direct oral anticoagulants have been approved for the prophylaxis and treatment of many thromboembolic-related diseases, but evidence on their use in cirrhotic patients is very limited. The aim of this review was to summarize the evidence about the safety and effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants for treating portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients.

Rebalanced hemostasis in liver disease: a misunderstood coagulopathy

The combination of frequently abnormal hemostatic markers and catastrophic bleeding as seen with variceal hemorrhage has contributed to the longstanding misperception that chronic liver disease (CLD) constitutes a bleeding diathesis. Laboratory studies of hemostasis in liver disease consistently challenge this with global coagulation assays incorporating activation of the protein C pathway demonstrating rebalanced hemostasis. It is now recognized that bleeding in CLD is predominantly secondary to portal hypertension (rather than a coagulopathy) and additionally that these patients are at increased risk of venous thrombosis, particularly in the portal venous system. This narrative review describes the current understanding of hemostasis in liver disease, as well as the periprocedural management of hemostasis and anticoagulation for management of venous thromboembolism in patients with CLD.

Anticoagulation and Vessel Recanalization in Cirrhotic Patients with Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis: A Multidisciplinary "Real Life" Experience

Background and Aim

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a potentially life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a multi-disciplinary approach and early anticoagulation therapy (AT) on bleeding/thrombotic events, recanalization rates and outcome of cirrhotic patients with SVT.

Methods

This is a single-center, registry-based cohort study. Over 17 years, 149 SVT patients were enrolled and prospectively evaluated. Regarding cirrhotic-SVT, a pre-specified algorithm, guiding initial posology of AT and follow-up visits schedule, was performed. Major bleeding (MB), thrombotic events, functional liver scores and all cause-mortality were investigated. Efficacy of AT was evaluated by radiological imaging.

Results

In cirrhotic-SVT, the incidence rate of MB was 8.4 per 100 patient-year (95% CI, 3.83–15.97), while the incidence rate of thrombosis was 5.6 per 100 patient-year (95% CI, 2.05–12.2). In incidental SVT treated with AT, MB incidence was 6.5 per 100 patient-year (95% CI: 2.8–12.82), while in symptomatic SVT was 2.2 per 100 patient-year (95% CI: 0.25–8.02). All thrombotic recurrences occurred in incidental SVT (7.7 per 100 patient-years; 95% CI, 3.71–14.26). Overall survival was significantly higher in patients who had at least a partial recanalization (p < 0.01) and partial/total recanalization was independently associated with improved MELD score at multivariate analysis (HR 2.62, 95% CI 1.1–6.47, p = 0.03).

Conclusion

In cirrhotic SVT patients, partial or total resolution of thrombosis ameliorates liver function and is associated with higher overall survival. A multidisciplinary approach together with radiological follow-up at pre-fixed time improves patient selection and monitoring.

Evolution of Nonmalignant Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis: A Pictorial Review

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication in liver cirrhosis, especially in advanced cirrhosis. It may be related to a higher risk of liver-related events and liver function deterioration. Imaging examinations can not only provide an accurate diagnosis of PVT, such as the extent of thrombus involvement and the degree of lumen occupied, but also identify the nature of thrombus (i.e., benign/malignant and acute/chronic). Evolution of PVT, mainly including development, recanalization, progression, stability, and recurrence, could also be assessed based on the imaging examinations. This article briefly reviews the pathophysiology, diagnosis, classification, and evolution of PVT with an emphasis on their computed tomography imaging features.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts in portal vein thrombosis: A review

The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) has previously been considered a contraindication to the insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSS). However, patients with PVT may have portal hypertension complications and may thus benefit from TIPSS to reduce portal venous pressure. There is an increasing body of literature that discusses the techniques and outcomes of TIPSS in PVT. This review summarizes the techniques, indications and outcomes of TIPSS in PVT in published case reports, case series and comparative trials, especially regarding the reduction in portal hypertensive complications such as variceal bleeding. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Manuscripts published in English between 1 January 1990 and 1 March 2021 were used. Abstracts were screened and data from potentially relevant articles analyzed. TIPSS in PVT has been reported with high levels of technical success, short-term portal vein recanalization and long-term PV patency and TIPSS patency outcomes. Several comparative studies, including randomized controlled trials, have shown favorable outcomes of TIPSS compared with non-TIPSS treatment of PVT complications. Outcomes of TIPSS with PVT appear similar to those in TIPSS without PVT. However, TIPSS may be more technically difficult in the presence of PVT, and such procedures should be performed in expert high-volume centers to mitigate the risk of procedural complications. The presence of PVT should no longer be considered a contraindication to TIPSS. TIPSS for PVT has been acknowledged as a therapeutic strategy in recent international guidelines, although further studies are needed before recommendations can be strengthened. KEY POINTS: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer a contraindication to the insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSS) TIPSS often leads to the spontaneous dissolution of PVT, but can be combined with mechanical or pharmacological thrombectomy TIPSS reduces portal hypertensive complications of PVT, such as variceal bleeding, and can also facilitate liver transplantation where PVT may otherwise interfere with vascular anastomoses Studies have shown favorable long-term outcomes of TIPSS compared with TIPSS without PVT; as well as compared with non-TIPSS treatment of PVT complications TIPSS in PVT should be performed in high-volume specialist centers due to technical difficulties.