Rates of Bleeding and Discontinuation of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Decompensated Cirrhosis

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.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin in Atrial Fibrillation Patients with Chronic Liver Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a prevalent cardiac arrhythmia. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), with superior efficacy and safety, have emerged as a promising alternative to warfarin. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of DOACs and warfarin in patients with AF and chronic liver disease (CLD). A systematic search was undertaken in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar to identify studies comparing the effectiveness of DOACs and warfarin in patients diagnosed with AF and CLD. Subsequent analyses were carried out using the random-effects model. This meta-analysis included eight studies involving 20,684 participants; baseline characteristics indicated a prevalent male presence (56.7%), with an average age of 61.63 ± 9 years. Primary outcomes demonstrated that DOACs were associated with significantly reduced all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.95; I 2 = 84%; P = .02) and ischemic stroke risk (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45-0.86; I 2 = 61%; P = .004). Secondary outcomes revealed a significantly reduced risk of major bleeding with DOACs compared to warfarin, while gastrointestinal bleeding showed a non-significant decrease. Intracranial hemorrhage risk was significantly lower with DOACs compared to warfarin. DOACs demonstrate superior safety and efficacy compared to warfarin, evidenced by reduced rates of all-cause death, ischemic stroke, severe bleeding, and cerebral hemorrhage. Further randomized controlled trials are essential to enhance the evidence base for DOACs across diverse patient populations.

Recommendations for the safe use of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cirrhosis based on a systematic review of pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety data

PURPOSE

The popularity of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) is increasing among patients with cirrhosis. Cirrhosis has a major impact on the pharmacokinetics of drugs, potentially increasing adverse events. Safe use of drugs in cirrhosis requires a diligent risk-benefit analysis. The aim of this study is to develop practice recommendations for safe use of DOACs in cirrhosis based on a systematic review of pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety data.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search to identify studies on pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of DOACs in cirrhosis. Data were collected and presented in summary tables by severity of cirrhosis using the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) classification. A multidisciplinary expert panel evaluated the results and classified the DOACs according to safety.

RESULTS

Fifty four studies were included. All DOACs were classified as 'no additional risks known' for CTP A. For CTP B, apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban were classified as 'no additional risks known'. Apixaban and edoxaban showed fewer adverse events in patients with cirrhosis, while dabigatran may be less impacted by severity of cirrhosis based on its pharmacokinetic profile. Rivaroxaban was classified as 'unsafe' in CTP B and C based on significant pharmacokinetic alterations. Due to lack of data, apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban were classified as 'unknown' for CTP C.

CONCLUSION

DOACs can be used in patients with CTP A cirrhosis, and apixaban, dabigatran and edoxaban can also be used in CTP B. It is recommended to avoid rivaroxaban in CTP B and C. There is insufficient evidence to support safe use of other DOACs in CTP C cirrhosis.

Efficacy of fresh frozen plasma transfusion in decompensated cirrhosis patients with coagulopathy admitted to ICU: a retrospective cohort study from MIMIC-IV database

We aimed to explore the association between FFP transfusion and outcomes of DC patients with significant coagulopathy. A total of 693 DC patients with significant coagulopathy were analyzed with 233 patients per group after propensity score matching (PSM). Patients who received FFP transfusion were matched with those receiving conventional therapy via PSM. Regression analysis showed FFP transfusion had no benefit in 30-day (HR: 1.08, 95% CI 0.83-1.4), 90-day (HR: 1.03, 95% CI 0.80-1.31) and in-hospital(HR: 1.30, 95% CI 0.90-1.89) mortality, associated with increased risk of liver failure (OR: 3.00, 95% CI 1.78-5.07), kidney failure (OR: 1.90, 95% CI 1.13-3.18), coagulation failure (OR: 2.55, 95% CI 1.52-4.27), respiratory failure (OR: 1.76, 95% CI 1.15-2.69), and circulatory failure (OR: 2.15, 95% CI 1.27-3.64), and even associated with prolonged the LOS ICU (β: 2.61, 95% CI 1.59-3.62) and LOS hospital (β: 6.59, 95% CI 2.62-10.57). In sensitivity analysis, multivariate analysis (HR: 1.09, 95%CI 0.86, 1.38), IPTW (HR: 1.11, 95%CI 0.95-1.29) and CAPS (HR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.86-1.38) showed FFP transfusion had no beneficial effect on the 30-day mortality. Smooth curve fitting demonstrated the risk of liver failure, kidney failure and circulatory failure increased by 3%, 2% and 2% respectively, for each 1 ml/kg increase in FFP transfusion. We found there was no significant difference of CLIF-SOFA and MELD score between the two group on day 0, 3, 7, 14. Compared with the conventional group, INR, APTT, and TBIL in the FFP transfusion group significantly increased, while PaO2/FiO2 significantly decreased within 14 days. In conclusion, FFP transfusion had no beneficial effect on the 30-day, 90-day, in-hospital mortality, was associated with prolonged the LOS ICU and LOS hospital, and the increased risk of liver failure, kidney failure, coagulation failure, respiratory failure and circulatory failure events. However, large, multi-center, randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies and external validation are still needed to verify the efficacy of FFP transfusion in the future.

Venous thromboembolism, chronic liver disease and anticoagulant choice: effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin

Background

Little to no data exist to guide treatment decision in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) and chronic liver disease.

Objectives

To assess the effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-individually and as a class-vs warfarin and between 2 DOACs in patients with acute VTE and chronic liver disease.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective, US claims-based, propensity score-matched cohort study in adults with acute VTE and chronic liver disease who had newly initiated oral anticoagulants between 2011 and 2017. The primary outcome was a composite of hospitalization for recurrent VTE and hospitalization for major bleeding.

Results

The cohorts included 2361 DOAC-warfarin, 895 apixaban-warfarin, 2161 rivaroxaban-warfarin, and 895 apixaban-rivaroxaban matched pairs. Lower risk of the primary outcome was seen with DOACs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.72; 95% CI, 0.61-0.85), apixaban (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.35-0.66) or rivaroxaban (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61-0.88) vs warfarin but not apixaban-rivaroxaban (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.43-1.08). The HRs of hospitalization for major bleeding were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.57-0.84) for DOAC-warfarin, 0.43 (95% CI, 0.30-0.63) for apixaban-warfarin, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58-0.89) for rivaroxaban-warfarin, and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.35-1.06) for apixaban-rivaroxaban. Recurrent VTE risk was lower with apixaban (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.26-0.86), but not DOACs (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.12) or rivaroxaban vs warfarin (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.57-1.14) or apixaban-rivaroxaban (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.42-2.02).

Conclusion

While the magnitude of clinical benefit varied across individual DOACs, in adults with acute VTE and chronic liver disease, oral factor Xa inhibitors (as a class or individually) were associated with lower risk of recurrent VTE and major bleeding.

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.

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of splanchnic vein thrombosis: A state of art

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a manifestation of venous thromboembolism in an unusual site. Portal, mesenteric, and splenic veins are the most common vessels involved in SVT which occurs mainly in patients with liver cirrhosis, although non-cirrhotic patients could be affected as well. Thrombosis of hepatic veins, also known as Budd-Chiari syndrome, is another manifestation of SVT. Prompt diagnosis and intervention are mandatory in order to increase the recalization rate and reduce the risk of thrombus progression and hypertensive complications. Traditional anticoagulation with heparin and vitamin-K antagonists is the treatment of choice in these cases. However, recent studies have shown promising results on the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this setting. Available results are mainly based on retrospective studies with small sample size, but first clinical trials have been published in the last years. This manuscript aims to provide an updated overview of the current evidence regarding the role of DOACs for SVT in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients.

Austrian consensus on the diagnosis and management of portal hypertension in advanced chronic liver disease (Billroth IV)

The Billroth IV consensus was developed during a consensus meeting of the Austrian Society of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (ÖGGH) and the Austrian Society of Interventional Radiology (ÖGIR) held on the 26th of November 2022 in Vienna.Based on international recommendations and considering recent landmark studies, the Billroth IV consensus provides guidance regarding the diagnosis and management of portal hypertension in advanced chronic 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.

Outcome of Budd-Chiari Syndrome Patients Treated With Direct Oral Anticoagulants: An Austrian Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may simplify management of Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS). Here, we report our experience with off-label use of DOACs for anticoagulation in BCS.

METHODS

The safety of DOAC vs vitamin K antagonist treatment as well as associated clinical outcomes were retrospectively assessed in 47 BCS patients treated at 6 Austrian centers.

RESULTS

Mean age at study inclusion was 37.9 ± 14.0 years and mean Model for End-Stage Liver Disease was 13.1 ± 5.1. Overall, 63.8% (n = 30) of patients had decompensated liver disease, and 87.2% (n = 41) showed clinical signs of portal hypertension. During a median follow-up of 82.5 (interquartile range, 43.1-121.8) months, 43 (91.5%) patients received anticoagulation alone or following interventional treatment, including 22 (46.8%) patients treated with DOACs (edoxaban: 10, apixaban: 4, rivaroxaban: 3, dabigatran: 3, more than one DOAC sequentially: 2) for a median of 24.4 (interquartile range, 5.7-35.1) months. While 72.7% (n = 16 of 22) of patients were switched from low-molecular-weight heparin (n = 12) or vitamin K antagonist (n = 4) to DOAC after disease stabilization or improvement, 27.3% (n = 6 of 22) of BCS patients were initially treated with DOAC. Complete response (European Association for the Study of the Liver criteria) was achieved or maintained in 14 (63.6%) of 22 patients, with ongoing response in 2 patients, while disease progressed in 6 patients (including 2 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma). Four major spontaneous bleedings (18.2%; incidence rate 8.8 per 100 patient-years; n = 2 upper gastrointestinal bleeding, n = 1 lower gastrointestinal bleeding, n = 1 hepatocellular carcinoma rupture), 7 minor bleedings, and 1 major procedure-related bleeding (4.5%; 2.2 per 100 patient-years) occurred during DOAC therapy. Overall transplant-free survival was 91.6% at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

DOACs seem to be effective and safe for long-term anticoagulation in patients with BCS, but confirmation by larger prospective studies is needed.

Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Decompensated Liver Cirrhosis: Bold and Brave?

Atrial fibrillation is frequently diagnosed in patients with liver cirrhosis, especially in those with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis or alcoholic etiology. Anticoagulant treatment is recommended for thromboembolic protection in patients with atrial fibrillation. Considering the impaired coagulation balance in liver cirrhosis, predisposing patients to bleed or thrombotic events, the anticoagulant treatment is still a matter of debate. Although patients with liver cirrhosis were excluded from the pivotal studies that confirmed the efficacy and safety of the anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation, data from real-life cohorts demonstrated that the anticoagulant treatment in patients with liver cirrhosis could be safe. This review aimed to evaluate the recent data regarding the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatment in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. Direct oral anticoagulants are safer than warfarin in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis. In Child-Pugh class C liver cirrhosis, direct oral anticoagulants are contraindicated. New bleeding and ischemic risk scores should be developed especially for patients with liver cirrhosis, and biomarkers for bleeding complications should be implemented in clinical practice to personalize this treatment in a very difficult population represented by decompensated liver cirrhosis patients.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants and Warfarin in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Chronic Liver Disease: A Nationwide Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The benefit-risk profile of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin, and between DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic liver disease is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a new-user, retrospective cohort study of patients with AF and chronic liver disease who were enrolled in a large, US-based administrative database between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2017. We assessed the effectiveness and safety of DOACs (as a class and individually) compared with warfarin, and between DOACs in patients with AF and chronic liver disease. The primary outcomes were hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and hospitalization for major bleeding. Inverse probability treatment weights were used to balance the treatment groups on measured confounders.

RESULTS

Overall, 10 209 participants were included, with 4421 (43.2%) on warfarin, 2721 (26.7%) apixaban, 2211 (21.7%) rivaroxaban, and 851 (8.3%) dabigatran. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism were 2.2, 1.4, 2.6, and 4.4 for DOACs as a class, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin, respectively. The incidence rates per 100 person-years for major bleeding were 7.9, 6.5, 9.1, and 15.0 for DOACs as a class, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin, respectively. After inverse probability treatment weights, the risk of hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism was significantly lower between DOACs as a class (hazard ratio [HR], 0.64 [95% CI, 0.46-0.90]) or apixaban (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.19-0.82]) compared with warfarin, but not significantly different between rivaroxaban versus warfarin (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.47-1.21]) or rivaroxaban versus apixaban (HR, 1.73 [95% CI, 0.91-3.29]). Compared with warfarin, the risk of hospitalization for major bleeding was lower with DOACs as a class (HR, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.58-0.82]), apixaban (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.46-0.78]), and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.62-1.0]). However, the risk of hospitalization for major bleeding was higher for rivaroxaban versus apixaban (HR, 1.59 [95% CI, 1.18-2.14]).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with AF and chronic liver disease, DOACs as a class were associated with lower risks of hospitalization for ischemic stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding versus warfarin. However, the incidence of clinical outcomes among patients with AF and chronic liver disease varied between individual DOACs and warfarin, and in head-to-head DOAC comparisons.

Clinically relevant increases in the international normalized ratio and model of end-stage liver disease score by therapeutic doses of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cirrhosis

Background

Patients with cirrhosis are increasingly using direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in therapeutic doses for the treatment of portal vein thrombosis or for concomitant atrial fibrillation. DOACs may affect routine diagnostic tests of coagulation including the international normalized ratio (INR). The INR is a part of the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, a validated score that predicts the mortality risk in patients with cirrhosis and is used to prioritize patients for liver transplantation. DOAC-induced increases in the INR may thus lead to artificial inflation of the MELD score.

Objective

We studied the effect of DOACs on INR prolongation in patients with cirrhosis.

Methods

We spiked plasma from 20 healthy individuals and 20 patients at the start of liver transplantation with DOACs in concentrations representing peak therapeutic levels. In addition, we studied INR increases in healthy controls and patients with mild cirrhosis who received the DOAC edoxaban for 1 week for study purposes.

Results

In controls and patients, the INR increased by an ex vivo addition of a DOAC, and the INR increase in patients was proportional to the baseline INR values. The increase in INR translated to a median increase of between 3 and 10 MELD points, depending on the DOAC used. In controls and patients alike, the INR increased on the ingestion of edoxaban, which translated to an increase in 5 MELD points.

Conclusions

Taken together, DOACs result in an INR increase that translates to clinically meaningful increases in MELD points in patients with cirrhosis, and precautions to avoid artificial inflation of the MELD score in these patients are warranted.

Rational hemostatic management in cirrhosis: from old paradigms to new clinical challenges

INTRODUCTION

Patients with cirrhosis are at risk of both thrombotic and hemorrhagic events. Traditional hemostatic tests are inadequate to assess the complex and fragile balance of hemostasis in this setting, especially in advanced stages of disease such as decompensated cirrhosis or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF). Furthermore, the indiscriminate use of pro-hemostatic agents for prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding episodes is still debated and often contraindicated. Alongside, splanchnic, and peripheral thrombotic events are frequent in this population and require management that involves a careful balance between risks and benefits of antithrombotic therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to address the state of the art on the clinical management of the hemostatic balance of cirrhosis in terms of established knowledge and future challenges.

EXPERT OPINION

The old paradigm of cirrhosis as a naturally anticoagulated condition has been challenged by more sophisticated global tests of hemostasis. Integrating this information in the clinical decision-making is still challenging for physicians and experts in hemostasis.

Coagulopathy and hemostasis management in patients undergoing liver transplantation: Defining a dynamic spectrum across phases of care

Patients with acute and chronic liver disease present with a wide range of disease states and severity that may require liver transplantation (LT). Physiologic alterations occur that are dynamic throughout all phases of perioperative care, creating complex management scenarios that necessitate multidisciplinary clinical care. Specifically, alterations in hemostasis in liver disease can be pronounced and evolve with disease progression over time. Recent studies and society guidance address this emerging paradigm and offer recommendations to assist with hemostatic management in patients with liver disease. However, patients undergoing LT are unique and diverse, often with unstable disease that requires specialized approaches. Our aim is to provide a focused review of hemostatic management of the LT patient, distinguish unique aspects of the three main phases of care (before LT, perioperative, and after LT), and identify knowledge gaps and critical areas of future research.

Safety and Efficacy of Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Moderate to Severe Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) remain mostly investigational in patients with moderate to severe hepatic cirrhosis, yet are often selected over traditional anticoagulants including warfarin and enoxaparin in this setting.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of DOACs in patients with moderate to severe hepatic cirrhosis as compared with traditional anticoagulation.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center cohort study evaluating inpatients and outpatients who were prescribed a DOAC, warfarin, or enoxaparin for therapeutic anticoagulation with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) B or C status at the time that the prescription was written. Included patients were followed until first bleeding or thromboembolic event, or until discontinuation of anticoagulation therapy. Data were collected by manual chart review. The primary outcomes included both bleeding events and thromboembolic events in the DOAC population as compared with traditional anticoagulation.

RESULTS

A total of 101 patients were included in the study, 69 treated with DOAC therapy and 32 with traditional anticoagulation. Bleeding events occurred in 36% of patients in the DOAC group and 22% of patients in the traditional group (P = 0.149). In both groups, bleeds were most commonly gastrointestinal. Thromboembolic events occurred in 4% of the DOAC population and no patients in the traditional population (P = 0.55). No fatal bleeding or thromboembolic events occurred.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

DOACs do not appear to be more harmful than traditional anticoagulation in patients with CTP B or C status. These results support the use of DOACs in patients with CTP B or C hepatic cirrhosis when considering safety, efficacy, and convenience.

Haemostatic alterations and management of haemostasis in patients with cirrhosis

Patients with cirrhosis frequently acquire complex changes in their haemostatic system including a decreased platelet count and decreased levels of various haemostatic proteins. Although historically patients with cirrhosis were thought to have a haemostasis-related bleeding tendency, it is now widely accepted that the haemostatic system of patients with cirrhosis remains in balance as a result of simultaneous changes in pro- and anti-haemostatic systems. The concept of rebalanced haemostasis has led to changes in clinical management, although firm evidence from well-designed clinical studies is largely lacking. For example, many invasive procedures in patients with cirrhosis and a prolonged prothrombin time are now performed without prophylaxis with fresh frozen plasma. Conversely, clinicians have become more aware of the need for anti-thrombotic therapy, even in those patients with abnormal routine coagulation tests. This paper will outline recent advances in pathogenesis, prevention and treatment of both bleeding and thrombotic complications in patients with cirrhosis. Among other topics, we will discuss the haemostatic status of acutely ill patients with cirrhosis, the various causes of bleeding in patients with cirrhosis, and how best to prevent or treat bleeding. In addition, we will discuss the hypercoagulable features of patients with cirrhosis, new insights into the pathogenesis of portal vein thrombosis, and how best to prevent or treat thromboses.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Treatment of Thrombosis or Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Cirrhosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Evidence for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with cirrhosis is limited. Few patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) class B and C cirrhosis have been studied.

OBJECTIVE

To compare major bleeding rates in patients with cirrhosis receiving a DOAC versus warfarin.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in adults with cirrhosis receiving a DOAC versus warfarin for venous thromboembolism, portal-vein thrombosis, or atrial fibrillation. The primary outcome was the rate of major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included time to major bleeding, clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding, all bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, intracranial bleeding, and new thromboembolic events. The study was approved by the Ochsner Health System Institutional Review Board.

RESULTS

A total of 44 patients receiving a DOAC and 41 patients receiving warfarin were included. Major bleeding occurred in 4 patients receiving a DOAC and 6 patients receiving warfarin (9.1% vs 14.6%; P = 0.881). Rates of major bleeding were similar in 24 DOAC and 17 warfarin patients with CTP Class B (4.2% vs 17.6%; P = 0.37) and 8 DOAC and 9 warfarin patients with CTP Class C (37.5% vs 11.1%; P = 0.41) cirrhosis. Secondary bleeding and efficacy outcomes were similar between cohorts. The study was limited by a small sample size.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Treatment with DOACs in patients with cirrhosis was associated with a similar rate of major bleeding compared with warfarin. Inclusion of CTP class C patients in future studies remains valuable to evaluate safety and efficacy of DOACs in this population.

EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines on prevention and management of bleeding and thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis

The prevention and management of bleeding and thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis poses several difficult clinical questions. These Clinical Practice Guidelines have been developed to provide practical guidance on debated topics, including current views on haemostasis in liver disease, controversy regarding the need to correct thrombocytopenia and abnormalities in the coagulation system in patients undergoing invasive procedures, and the need for thromboprophylaxis in hospitalised patients with haemostatic abnormalities. Multiple recommendations in this document are based on interventions that the panel feels are not useful, even though widely applied in clinical practice.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants compared to warfarin in cirrhotic patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) compared with warfarin in patients with both nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) and clinically confirmed liver cirrhosis (LC) has not been well studied. We compared the risk of a major bleeding event between DOAC and warfarin treatments in this patient population.

METHODS

A total of 238 cirrhotic patients with AF were retrospectively analyzed. The major bleeding event risk was compared between DOAC- and warfarin-treated groups. The median follow-up duration was 5.6 years.

RESULTS

Among the 238 study patients with LC and AF, 128 (53.8%) received DOACs and 110 (46.2%) received warfarin. The mean patient age was 68.8 years, and 78.2% were men. A major bleeding event occurred in 10 and 20 patients in the DOAC and warfarin groups, respectively, most commonly caused by gastrointestinal bleeding (70.0%). The cumulative risk of major bleeding did not differ between the groups by log-rank test (p = 0.12). This finding did not change when using 60 propensity score-matched pairs. A multivariable Cox regression model indicated that the concomitant use of antiplatelet agents (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 2.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00 to 4.30; p = 0.048) and presence of esophageal or gastric varices confirmed by endoscopic examination (aHR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.03 to 5.17; p = 0.04) were associated with major bleeding in the entire cohort.

CONCLUSION

A major bleeding event risk is not increased by DOAC compared with warfarin treatment. Antiplatelet agent use and varices are independently associated with a higher risk of major bleeding during anticoagulation.

Anticoagulation Considerations in Liver Disease

Coagulopathy of liver disease is a complex pathology that may result in thrombosis and/or bleeding complications. Routine laboratory values are not always reflective of the degree of these risks. Additionally, prophylaxis and treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cirrhosis require careful evaluation when selecting and monitoring drug therapy for these indications. Therefore, this article aims to provide insight regarding coagulopathy of liver disease, influence on laboratory values, and anticoagulant therapy considerations for critical care nurses assuming care for patients with cirrhosis.

A network meta-analysis of direct oral anticoagulants for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines have limited consensus on the approach to portal venous thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhotic patients. While there is rising interest in direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) use for PVT, current evidence is limited by small sample size and lack of comparisons to traditional anticoagulants. Thus, a network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the use of DOACs with traditional anticoagulants.

METHODS

Medline and Embase were searched for articles about anticoagulation use in cirrhotic patients with nontumorous PVT for articles on DOACs, warfarin, low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or antithrombin III. A network analysis was conducted using risk ratios (RR) with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). A single-arm meta-analysis was used to summarize the outcomes of DOAC treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 10 articles were included in the study. 79.5% (CI 38.8-95.9) of DOACs patients achieved complete or partial recanalization and 9.80% (CI 4.50-20.0) experienced a bleeding event. DOACs were superior to LMWH (RR 2.299, CI 1.037-5.093, p = 0.040), warfarin (RR 1.762, CI 1.017-3.053, p = 0.043) and no treatment (RR 3.489, CI 1.394-8.733, p = 0.008) in complete recanalization. For partial recanalization, while DOACs were not superior to any treatment, they had the highest probability in achieving partial recanalization in SUCRA analysis. Bleeding risk and mortality were similar compared to other treatments.

CONCLUSION

The network analysis supports the use of DOACs in cirrhotic patients, with significant rates of complete recanalization compared to other treatments without increasing bleeding risk. DOACs can potentially be considered for nontumorous PVT in cirrhosis.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with advanced liver disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

While direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used in patients with liver disease, safety data especially in advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) are limited.

METHODS

Liver disease patients receiving DOAC treatment (ACLD: n = 104; vascular liver disease: n = 29) or vitamin K antagonists (VKA)/low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH; ACLD: n = 45; vascular: n = 13) between January 2010 and September 2020 were retrospectively included. Invasive procedures and bleeding events were recorded. Calibrated anti-Xa peak levels and thrombomodulin-modified thrombin generation assays (TM-TGAs) were measured in a subgroup of 35/28 DOAC patients.

RESULTS

Among patients receiving DOAC, 55 (41.3%) had advanced liver dysfunction (Child-Pugh-stage [CPS] B/C) and 66 (49.6%) had experienced decompensation. Overall, 205 procedures were performed in 60 patients and procedure-related bleedings occurred in 7 (11.7%) patients. Additionally, 38 (28.6%) patients experienced spontaneous (15 minor, 23 major) bleedings during a median follow-up of 10.5 (IQR: 4.0-27.8) months. Spontaneous bleedings in ACLD patients were more common in CPS-B/C (at 12 months: 36.9% vs CPS-A: 15.9%, subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 3.23 [95% CI: 1.59-6.58], P < .001), as were major bleedings (at 12 months: 22.0% vs 5.0%, SHR: 5.82 [95% CI: 2.00-16.90], P < .001). Importantly, CPS (adjusted SHR: 4.12 [91% CI: 1.82-9.37], P < .001), but not the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma or varices, was independently associated with major bleeding during DOAC treatment. Additionally, ACLD patients experiencing bleeding had worse overall survival (at 12 months: 88.9% vs 95.0% without bleeding; P < .001). Edoxaban anti-Xa peak levels were higher in patients with CPS-B/C (345 [95% CI: 169-395] vs CPS-A: 137 [95% CI: 96-248] ng/mL, P = .048) and were associated with lower TM-TGA. Importantly, spontaneous bleeding rates were comparable to VKA/LMWH patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulants including DOACs should be used with caution in patients with advanced liver disease due to a significant rate of spontaneous bleeding events.

Treatment of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis

Although patients with cirrhosis are known to be in a state of “rebalance” in that pro- and anticoagulant factors increase the risk for both bleeding and thrombosis, the prevalence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis can be up to 26%. Therefore, physicians should consider anticoagulation for the prevention and management of PVT in patients with cirrhosis who are at high risk of PVT. Vitamin K antagonist or low molecular weight heparin is suggested as the standard treatment for PVT in cirrhosis. With the advent of new direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), there is a paradigm shift of switching to DOACs for the treatment of PVT in patients with cirrhosis. However, the safety and efficacy of DOACs in the treatment of PVT was not well-known in patients with cirrhosis. Therefore, this review focused on the current knowledge about the efficacy, safety concerns, and hepatic metabolism of DOACs in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

2020 Clinical Update in Liver Transplantation

The gold standard treatment of end-stage liver disease continues to be liver transplantation (LT). The challenges of LT require skilled anesthesiologists to anticipate physiologic changes associated with end-stage liver disease and surgical considerations that affect multiple organ systems. While on the waiting list, patients may be placed on new anticoagulation medications that can confound already complex coagulopathy in LT patients. Pain management often is an afterthought for such a complex procedure, but appropriate medications can help control pain while limiting opioid medications. Surgical stress and medications for immunosuppression can affect perioperative glucose management in ways that have implications for patient and graft survival. The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic in 2020 provided a new challenge for anesthesiologists. The uncertainty of the novel respiratory virus challenged providers beyond just LT patients.