Portal Vein Recanalization and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation for Chronic Portal Vein Thrombosis: Technical Considerations

Central Venous Recanalization and Right Atrial Thrombectomy Using IVUS

Central venous occlusions (CVOs) of the systemic circulation are highly morbid, causing significant symptoms from venous congestion, venous thromboembolism (VTE) and impaired vascular access. Endovascular recanalization (EVR) has emerged as the treatment of choice for medically refractory nonthrombotic and thrombotic CVOs with Intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS) playing a pivotal role. Radial and side-firing IVUS catheters are used during central venous recanalization in the chest, abdomen and pelvis. The intraluminal ultrasonic view of a CVO shows dynamic details of pathology not obtained with conventional venography or cone-beam CT, allowing for a more accurate evaluation of clot burden, wall integrity, tumor invasion, occlusion length and luminal caliber. IVUS is also superb for guiding treatment of CVOs involving blunt and sharp recanalization, stenting, and mechanical thromboembolectomy (MTE) of VTE, especially high-risk free-floating thrombi (FFT) and clot in-transit (CIT) in the right atrium (RA). It most accurately assesses procedural endpoints, including successful intravascular traversal across an occlusion, adequate luminal gain after venoplasty and stenting, and complete clot extraction during thrombectomy. Moreover, this is all done without added contrast or radiation, which is paramount to reduce exposure during a challenging recanalization, especially in the aging hemodialysis population. Long-term data is now available that shows IVUS can enhance technical and clinical success and reduce complications during EVR. To achieve these benefits with IVUS interventionalists must be familiar with the available catheters and how to optimize and interpret the intraluminal images obtained. This paper will review the patient evaluation, indications, equipment, steps, challenges, complications, and outcomes for central venous recanalization (CVR) and RA thrombectomy with IVUS.

Safety and Efficacy of Portal Vein Recanalization with Creation of Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (PVR-TIPS) to Treat Chronic Portal Vein Thrombosis in Non-cirrhotic Patients

PURPOSE

This study assesses the efficacy and safety of Portal Vein Recanalization with Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (PVR-TIPS) in non-cirrhotic patients with chronic portal vein occlusion (CPVO), cavernomatous transformation, and symptomatic portal hypertension (PH) and/or portal vein thrombotic progression.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Medical records of 21 non-cirrhotic patients with CPVO and portal cavernoma undergoing PVR-TIPS were analyzed. Hemodynamic (intraprocedural reduction in portosystemic pressure gradient), clinical (data on gastrointestinal bleeding, abdominal pain, ascites, and presence of esophageal varices from imaging exams) and technical success (PVR-TIPS) assessed efficacy. Safety was determined through complications classified according to the CIRSE Classification System.

RESULTS

PVR-TIPS was successfully performed in all patients, resulting in a significant reduction in portal pressure gradient by 10 mmHg (21.475 ± 9.7 mmHg - 11.454 ± 5,4 mmHg, p < 0.001), alleviating portal hypertension symptoms without thrombotic progression. Clinical success included resolution or reduction of ascites (p = 0.016), gastroesophageal varices (p = 0.004), abdominal pain (p = 0.0021), and cessation of gastrointestinal bleeding (p = 0.021). Complications occurred in 33% of patients, including six grade III events (1 perioperative liver bleeding, 5 delayed stent occlusions) and one grade VI event resulting in death (4.8%). Primary patency rate was 76% (21.3 months, range:0.2-82), secondary patency 100% (4 months, range:3.8-40.8). Survival at follow-up was 90.4%, with one unrelated death. One patient underwent liver transplantation, three became eligible post-recanalization.

CONCLUSION

PVR-TIPS proves effective and safe in reducing portal pressure gradient, thereby alleviating PH symptoms without evidence of portal thrombosis progression in non-cirrhotic patients with CPVO and portal cavernoma. It expands therapeutic options, including liver transplantation.

Endovascular Management of Noncirrhotic Acute Portomesenteric Venous Thrombosis

Acute portomesenteric venous thrombosis (PVT) is a rare but potentially life-threatening condition in individuals without cirrhosis. Initial management typically involves anticoagulation therapy, but the optimal approach to interventional treatment remains a topic of ongoing research. This article explores both traditional and emerging endovascular techniques, providing an overview of the existing evidence supporting their use. Additionally, it delves into the significance of acute PVT in the context of contemporary pathologies, notably coronavirus disease 2019 infection, vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, and liver transplantation.

"Bottoms-up" portal venous recanalization TIPS (PVR-TIPS) utilizing a re-entry catheter

BACKGROUND

Three patients with portal hypertension and gastrointestinal bleeding due to non-cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis were treated with portal venous recanalization transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) via a trans-splenic access.

MAIN BODY

A "bottoms-up" retrograde puncture of the right hepatic vein was performed using a re-entry catheter to gain access to the right hepatic vein. In all patients a successful retrograde puncture of the right hepatic vein was achieved, thereby restoring the splenoportal tract.

CONCLUSION

Our cases present an alternative approach to treat chronic portal vein thrombosis expanding the possibilities of the PVR-TIPS procedure.

Percutaneous management of chronic total occlusion of the portal vein: a retrospective analysis of technical aspects and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Chronic total occlusion (CTO) of the portal vein is one of the main causes of portal hypertension, which may result in life-threatening complications often managed by interventional radiology (IR). The aim of this study is to report the innovative experience with percutaneous revascularization therapy in the management of portal vein CTO in paediatric and adult patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2020 to December 2023 consecutive paediatric and adult patients with severe portal hypertension resulting from portal vein CTO who underwent attempts at percutaneous recanalization were retrospectively reviewed. Technical aspects including the percutaneous approach, portal vein stenting, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation, varices embolization and clinical outcomes including adverse events and control of portal hypertension were analyzed. Technical success was defined as at least partial restoration of the portal vein patency at the final angiogram. Clinical success was defined as the improvement of clinical-laboratory signs of portal hypertension and control for variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (median age = 21 years, range = 59 years; 10 males; 5 children) with portal vein CTO underwent a total of 25 percutaneous revascularization procedures. Nine patients (60%; 5 children, 4 adults) were liver transplant recipients. All patients except one had cavernous transformation of the extra-hepatic portal vein, involving the spleno-mesenteric confluence in 5 cases. Technical success was achieved in 13/15 (87%) patients of whom 8 had portal revascularization through the placement of an extra-hepatic stent; indeed, in six cases, a TIPS was performed to achieve sustained portal vein patency. Embolization of varices and/or cavernoma was performed in 12 patients. Adverse events occurred in 2/15 (splenic artery perforation and hemoperitoneum, one each) managed without sequelae. Technical success led to clinical success in all the 13/15 (87%) cases, with a median follow-up of 20 months (IQR 4-34 months).

CONCLUSION

CTO can be managed effectively by interventional radiology. Restored portal flow physiology alone is possible in most patients, while TIPS may be required in a small proportion of them, to prolong portal vein patency and control portal hypertension.

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.

Portal Vein Recanalization Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt for Noncirrhotic Chronic Portal Vein Thrombosis Leading to Successful Pregnancy: Case Report

Portal vein recanalization transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) is a safe and effective procedure for decompression of portal hypertension (PH). In this short case series, 2 women with chronic noncirrhotic portal vein thrombosis were treated with PVR-TIPS. Both patients hoped to conceive. Without treatment for their PH, their pregnancies posed a significant risk of life-threatening variceal bleeding. Both patients tolerated the procedure well and delivered without complications of PH. In future cases of noncirrhotic portal vein thrombosis in patients hoping to conceive, PVR-TIPS should be considered for definitive treatment of PH.

Transjugular mesenteric-caval shunt for portal vein cavernous transformation with recurrent variceal bleeding: preliminary results

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the transjugular mesenteric-caval shunt (TMCS) as a treatment for the cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV) and recurrent variceal bleeding.

METHODS

This retrospective case series was conducted with approval from the institutional review board. It involved seven patients diagnosed with CTPV and recurrent variceal bleeding who underwent the TMCS procedure. We analyzed the rate of procedural complications, incidents of rebleeding, stent stenosis, hepatic encephalopathy, and overall survival to assess treatment outcomes.

RESULTS

The TMCS was successfully performed in all seven patients without any life-threatening complications. Postoperatively, one patient developed a lung infection and pleural effusion, which resolved with appropriate treatment. Additionally, two patients experienced an increase in total bilirubin levels, but there was no further deterioration in liver function. The median portal pressure gradient significantly decreased from a preoperative value of 27 mmHg (range 20-36 mmHg) to a postoperative value of 6 mmHg (range 4-11 mmHg). A notable improvement was observed in one cirrhotic patient, with liver function progressing from Child-Pugh class B (score 9) to class A (score 6). Over a median follow-up period of 14 months (range 7-18 months), none of the patients encountered rebleeding, stent stenosis, hepatic encephalopathy, or mortality.

CONCLUSION

The TMCS appears to be a viable and effective alternative for managing CTPV with recurrent variceal bleeding. Its long-term outcome requires further evaluation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

TMCS provides a promising treatment for patients with life-threatening CTPV complications when occluded portal vein cannot be recanalized and portal vein recanalization TIPS is not an option.

KEY POINTS

Performing TIPS in patients with portal vein cavernoma is complex due to the requirement for recanalization of the occluded portal vein. Creating a mesenteric-caval shunt through a transjugular approach is a feasible technique. Establishing a TMCS provides a means to manage life-threatening complications arising from portal vein cavernoma.

Safety and effectiveness of transsplenic access for portal venous interventions: a single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous transsplenic access (PTSA) for portal vein (PV) interventions among patients with PV disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult patients with PV disease were enrolled if they required percutaneous catheterization for PV angioplasty, embolization, thrombectomy, variceal embolization, or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement for a difficult TIPS or recanalization of a chronically occluded PV. The procedures were performed between January 2018 and January 2023. Patients were excluded if they had an active infection, had a chronically occluded splenic vein malignant infiltration of the needle tract, had undergone splenectomy, or were under age 18 years.

RESULTS

Thirty patients (15 women, 15 men) were enrolled. Catheterization of the PV through PTSA succeeded for 29 of 30 patients (96.7%). The main adverse effect recorded was flank pain in 5 of 30 cases (16.7%). No bleeding events from the spleen, splenic vein, or percutaneous access point were recorded. Two cases (6.7%) each of hepatic bleeding and rethrombosis of the PV were reported, and a change in hemoglobin levels (mean [SD], - 0.5 [1.4] g/dL) was documented in 14 cases (46.7%).

CONCLUSION

PTSA as an approach to accessing the PV is secure and achievable, with minimal risk of complications. Minimal to no bleeding is possible by using tract closure methods.

Intra-abdominal Venous Thromboses and Their Management

While a plethora of articles discuss management of deep venous thromboses in extremities, there is a relative scarcity of literature comprehensively describing intra-abdominal venous thromboses, and their management. Intra-abdominal venous thromboses include iliocaval venous obstruction (ICVO), hepatic venous thrombosis (HVT), portal venous thrombosis (PVT), renal vein thrombosis (RVT), splenic vein thrombosis (SVT), and gonadal vein thrombosis (GVT); each of which provides unique microenvironmental challenges to management. Doppler ultrasound is the first line imaging modality for diagnosis, and computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging can help define the extent of thrombus burden and aid with interventional planning. Systemic anticoagulation remains the common medical treatment for intra-abdominal venous thrombosis, however, catheter directed thrombolysis and thrombectomy show positive outcomes in ICVO, HVT, PVT, and RVT, with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation especially beneficial in HVT and PVT. In this review article, we describe pathophysiology, clinical features, imaging findings, and current management options for intra-abdominal venous thromboses.

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.

Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Liver Transplant Setting

Liver transplantation is currently the only curative therapy for patients with liver cirrhosis. Not all patients in the natural course of the disease will undergo transplantation, but the majority of them will experience portal hypertension and its complications. In addition to medical and endoscopic therapy, a key role in managing these complications is played by the placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Some indications for TIPS placement are well-established, and they are expanding and broadening over time. This review aims to describe the role of TIPS in managing patients with liver cirrhosis, in light of liver transplantation. As far as it is known, TIPS placement seems not to affect the surgical aspects of liver transplantation, in terms of intraoperative bleeding rates, postoperative complications, or length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit. However, the placement of a TIPS "towards transplant" can offer advantages in terms of ameliorating a patient's clinical condition at the time of transplantation and improving patient survival. Additionally, the TIPS procedure can help preserve the technical feasibility of the transplant itself. In this context, indications for TIPS placement at an earlier stage are drawing particular attention. However, TIPS insertion in decompensated patients can also lead to serious adverse events. For these reasons, further studies are needed to make reliable recommendations for TIPS in the pre-transplant setting.

Recanalization of Portal Vein Graft Occlusion via a Percutaneous Transmesenteric Approach: A Case Report

Interventional recanalization is an effective treatment option for postoperative portal vein occlusion. A transhepatic or transsplenic approach is preferred, whereas a percutaneous transmesenteric route enables antegrade cannulation. Here, we present a case of successful percutaneous transmesenteric recanalization in a patient with a postoperative portal vein graft occlusion.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt: Devices Evolution, Technical Tips and Future Perspectives

Portal hypertension (PH) constitutes a pivotal factor in the progression of cirrhosis, giving rise to severe complications and a diminished survival rate. The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure has undergone significant evolution, with advancements in stent technology assuming a central role in managing PH-related complications. This review aims to outline the progression of TIPS and emphasizes the significant influence of stent advancement on its effectiveness. Initially, the use of bare metal stents (BMSs) was limited due to frequent dysfunction. However, the advent of expanding polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stent grafts (ePTFE-SGs) heralded a transformative era, greatly enhancing patency rates. Further innovation culminated in the creation of ePTFE-SGs with controlled expansion, enabling precise adjustment of TIPS diameters. Comparative analyses demonstrated the superiority of ePTFE-SGs over BMSs, resulting in improved patency, fewer complications, and higher survival rates. Additional technical findings highlight the importance of central stent placement and adequate stent length, as well as the use of smaller calibers to reduce the risk of shunt-related complications. However, improving TIPS through technical means alone is inadequate for optimizing patient outcomes. An extensive understanding of hemodynamic, cardiac, and systemic factors is required to predict outcomes and tailor a personalized approach. Looking forward, the ongoing progress in SG technology, paired with the control of clinical factors that can impact outcomes, holds the promise of reshaping the management of PH-related complications in cirrhosis.

Safety of Percutaneous Transmesenteric and Transsplenic Access for Portosystemic Shunt Creation in Patients with Portal Vein Obstruction: Single-Center Experience and Review of Literature

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety of ultrasound-guided percutaneous mesenteric vein access compared to transsplenic portal vein access for portosystemic shunt placement in patients with portal vein obstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight patients underwent portosystemic shunt creation through either a transsplenic (n = 4) or transmesenteric (n = 4) approach. The superior or inferior mesenteric vein was percutaneously accessed under ultrasound guidance using a 21G needle and a 4F sheath. Hemostasis at the mesenteric access site was achieved with manual compression. For transsplenic access, sheath sizes between 6 and 8F were used and tract embolization with gelfoam was performed.

RESULTS

Portosystemic shunt placement was successful in all patients. While there were no bleeding complications with transmesenteric access, hemorrhagic shock requiring splenic artery embolization occurred in one patient in which the transsplenic approach was used.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasound-guided mesenteric vein access seems feasible and a valid alternative to the transsplenic access in case of portal vein obstruction. Level of Evidence Level 4, case series.

New Indications for TIPSs: What Do We Know So Far?

Since 1988, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been an effective therapy for portal hypertension in many settings. Thanks to continuous technical improvements and a wiser selection of patients, excellent results have been achieved with this therapeutic strategy. The historical indications for TIPS placement, in the context of liver cirrhosis, such as refractory ascites and variceal bleeding are now well established and known. However, in recent years, new indications are emerging. These have been investigated and approved in some studies but are not yet included in guidelines and clinical practice. This review aims to highlight what is new for the role of TIPS in portal vein thrombosis (especially in patients awaiting liver transplantation), in recurrent ascites and not only refractory ascites, as a neoadjuvant therapy before abdominal surgery and, finally, in the setting of noncirrhotic portal hypertension. All these new aspects are addressed in this review with a critical approach based on the literature revision and clinical practice. Future research is needed to explore and validate the new role of TIPS in these scenarios.

Portal Fibrotic Cord is Associated with Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Failure and Death in Cirrhotic Patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Occlusive portal vein thrombosis (PVT) often causes portal hypertension-related complications in cirrhotic patients. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an effective treatment for this difficult problem. However, the factors influencing TIPS success and overall survival in patients with occlusive PVT are unknown. This study investigated the factors influencing TIPS success and overall survival in cirrhotic patients with occlusive PVT.

METHODS

Cirrhotic patients with occlusive PVT were selected from a prospective database of consecutive patients treated with TIPS in Xijing Hospital between January 2015 and May 2021. Baseline characteristics, TIPS success rate, complications, and survival were collected, and the factors associated with the TIPS success rate and transplant-free survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 155 cirrhotic patients with occlusive PVT were enrolled. TIPS succeeded in 126 (81.29%) cases. The 1-year survival rate was 74%. Compared with those without, patients with portal fibrotic cord had a lower TIPS success rate (39.02% vs. 96.49%, p<0.001), shorter median overall survival (300 vs. 1,730 days, p<0.001) and more operation-related complications (12.20% vs. 1.75%, p<0.01). Logistic regression analysis found that portal fibrotic cord (odds ratio 0.024) was a risk factor for TIPS failure. Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that portal fibrotic cord was an independent predictor of death (hazard ratio 2.111; 95% CI: 1.094-4.071, p=0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Portal fibrotic cord increased the TIPS failure rate and is a risk factor for poor prognosis in cirrhotic patients.

Transjugular intrahepatic collateral-systemic shunt is effective for cavernous transformation of the portal vein with variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The transjugular intrahepatic portal collateral-systemic shunt (transcollateral TIPS) is used to treat portal hypertension-related complications in patients with cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV) and whose main portal vein cannot be recanalized. It is still not clear whether transcollateral TIPS can be as effective as portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcollateral TIPS in the treatment of refractory variceal bleeding with CTPV.

METHODS

Patients with refractory variceal bleeding caused by CTPV were selected from the database of consecutive patients treated with TIPS in Xijing Hospital from January 2015 to March 2022. They were divided into the transcollateral TIPS group and the PVR-TIPS group. The rebleeding rate, overall survival, shunt dysfunction, overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE) and operation-related complications were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients were enrolled, including 21 patients with transcollateral TIPS and 171 patients with PVR-TIPS. Compared with the patients with PVR-TIPS, the patients with transcollateral TIPS had more noncirrhosis (52.4 vs. 19.9%, p = 0.002), underwent fewer splenectomies (14.3 vs. 40.9%, p = 0.018), and had more extensive thromboses (38.1 vs. 15.2%, p = 0.026). There were no differences in rebleeding, survival, shunt dysfunction, or operation-related complication rates between the transcollateral TIPS and PVR-TIPS groups. However, the OHE rate was significantly lower in the transcollateral TIPS group (9.5 vs. 35.1%, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Transcollateral TIPS is an effective treatment for CTPV with refractory variceal bleeding.

Transsplenic tract closure after transsplenic portalvenous access using gelfoam-based tract plugging

BACKGROUND

To assess the feasibility and safety of a gelfoam torpedo plugging technique for embolization of the transsplenic access channel in adult patients following transvenous portal vein interventions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 09/2016 and 08/2021, an ultrasound guided transsplenic portalvenous access (TSPVA) was established in twenty-four adult patients with a 21-G needle and 4-F microsheath under ultrasound guidance. Afterwards, sheaths ranging from 4-F to 8-F were inserted as needed for the procedure. Following portal vein intervention, the splenic access tract was embolized with a gelfoam-based tract plugging (GFTP) technique. TSPVA and GFTP were performed twice in two patients. Patients' pre-interventional and procedural characteristics were analyzed to assess the feasibility and safety of the plugging technique according Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe (CIRSE) classification system. Values are given as median (minimum;maximum). Subgroup analysis of intercostal vs. subcostal puncture site for TSPVA was performed using the two-sided Mann-Whitney-U test or Student's t-test and Fisher's exact test. Level of significance was p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The study population's age was 56 (29;71) years and 54% were female patients. Primary liver disease was predominantly liver cirrhosis with 62% of the patients. Pre-interventional model for end-stage liver disease score was 9 (6;25), international normalized ratio was 1.15 (0.86;1.51), activated partial thromboplastin time was 33s (26s;52s) and platelet count was 88.000/µL (31.000;273.000/µL). Ascites was present in 76% of the cases. Craniocaudal spleen diameter was 17cm (10cm;25cm). Indication for TSPVA was assisted transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement in 16 cases and revision in two cases, portal vein stent placement in five cases and variceal embolization in three cases. TSPVA was successfully established in all interventions; interventional success rate was 85% (22/26). The splenic access time was 33min (10min;133min) and the total procedure time was 208min (110min;429min). Splenic access was performed with a subcostal route in 11 interventions and with an intercostal route in 15 interventions. Final sheath size was 4-F in 17 cases, 5-F in three cases, 6-F in five cases, 7-F in two cases and 8-F in one case. A median of two gelfoam cubes was used for GFTP. TSPVA- and GFTP-related complications occurred in 4 of 26 interventions (15%) with a subcapsular hematoma of the spleen in two patients (CIRSE grade 1), access-related infection in one patient (CIRSE grade 3) and both in one patient (CIRSE grade 3). In detail, one access-related complication occurred in a patient with subcostal TSPVA (CIRSE grade 1 complication) and the other three complications occurred in patients with intercostal TSPVA (one CIRSE grade 1 complication and two CIRSE grade 3 complication) (p = 0.614). No patient required interventional or surgical treatment due to puncture tract bleeding.

CONCLUSION

Gelfoam-based plugging of the puncture tract was feasible and safe for transsplenic access in adult patients undergoing percutaneous portal vein interventions. The lack of major bleeding complications and complete absorption of the gelatine sponge make it a safe alternative to transjugular and transhepatic access and re-interventions via the splenic route.

Interventional Approach to Portal Vein Thrombosis and Liver Transplantation: State of the Art

Porto-mesenteric vein thrombosis (PVT) is a well-recognized but uncommon disease entity in patients with and without cirrhosis. Given the complexity of these patients, there are many differing treatment algorithms depending on the individual circumstances of a given patient. The focus of this review is primarily patients with cirrhosis, with an emphasis on liver transplantation considerations. The presence of cirrhosis substantially affects work-up, prognosis, and management of these patients and will substantially affect the patient treatment and have additional implications for prognosis and long-term outcomes. Here, we review the incidence of portal vein thrombosis in known cirrhotic patients, medical and interventional treatment options that are currently used, and, in particular, how to approach cirrhotic patients with PVT who are awaiting liver transplantation.

Portal Vein Recanalization-Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (PVR-TIPS) Facilitates Liver Transplantation in Cirrhotic Patients with Occlusive Portal Vein Thrombosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a heterogeneous condition with multiple possible etiologies and to varying degrees has historically limited candidacy for liver transplant (LT) in the cirrhotic patient population due to resultant difficulties in constructing a robust portal vein anastomosis. While intraoperative approaches to managing PVT are well-described, methods which approximate normal portal physiology are not always feasible depending on the extent of PVT, and other nonphysiologic techniques are linked with substantial morbidity and poor long-term outcomes. Portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) creation is an efficacious method of restoring physiologic portal flow in cirrhotic patients prior to LT allowing for end-to-end PV anastomosis, and is the product of decades-long institutional expertise in TIPS/LT and the support of a multidisciplinary liver tumor board. To follow is a review of the pertinent pathophysiology of PVT in cirrhosis, the rationale leading to the development and subsequent evolution of the PVR-TIPS procedure, technical lessons learned, and a summary of outcomes to date.

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.

Portal Interventions in the Setting of Venous Thrombosis or Occlusion

Portal vein thrombosis most commonly occurs as a complication of liver cirrhosis and can result in worsening symptoms of portal hypertension, which often can be challenging to treat with conventional decompression therapies. In addition, because complete portal vein thrombosis is associated with higher posttransplant morbidity and mortality, it is regarded as a relative contraindication to liver transplant. Often, the diagnosis of portal vein thrombosis is incidental; hence, imaging remains the mainstay for diagnosing this complication and is used to guide subsequent treatment. Although anticoagulation is the initial approach used to treat acute portal vein thrombosis, endovascular and/or surgical interventions may be necessary when there is concern for impending bowel ischemia. Treatment of chronic portal vein thrombosis is primarily aimed at alleviating the symptoms of portal hypertension and improving the chance of candidacy for liver transplant. Awareness of the portal venous anatomy to differentiate it from the periportal collaterals is key during recanalization of a chronically occluded portal vein. The authors provide an overview of the pathophysiology, acute and chronic imaging findings, and management of portal vein thrombosis, with a specific focus on endovascular management, as well as a summary of the current related literature. An invited commentary by Lopera and Yamaguchi is available online. ©RSNA, 2022.

Transsplenic Portal System Catheterization: Review of Current Indications and Techniques

Multiple diseases of the portal system require effective portal vein access for endovascular management. While percutaneous transhepatic and transjugular approaches remain the standard methods of portal vein access, transsplenic access (TSA) has gained recognition as an effective and safe technique to access the portal system in patients with contraindications to traditional approaches. Recently, the utility of percutaneous TSA has grown, with described treatments including recanalization of chronic portal vein occlusion, placement of stents for portal vein stenosis, portal vein embolization of the liver, embolization of gastric varices, placement of complicated transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, and interventions after liver transplant. The authors provide a review of percutaneous TSA, including indications, a summary of related portal vein diseases, and the different techniques used for access and closure. In addition, an imaging-based review of technical considerations of TSA interventions is presented, with a review of potential procedural complications. With technical success rates that mirror or rival the standard methods and reported low rates of major complications, TSA can be a safe and effective option in clinical scenarios where traditional approaches are not feasible. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Preoperative portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for chronic obliterative portal vein thrombosis: Outcomes following liver transplantation

High-grade portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is often considered to be a technically challenging scenario for liver transplantation (LT) and in some centers a relative contraindication. This study compares patients with chronic obliterative PVT who underwent portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) and subsequent LT to those with partial nonocclusive PVT who underwent LT without an intervention. This institutional review board-approved study analyzed 49 patients with cirrhosis with PVT from 2000 to 2020 at our institution. Patients were divided into two groups, those that received PVR-TIPS due to anticipated surgical challenges from chronic obliterative PVT and those who did not because of partial PVT. Demographic data and long-term outcomes were compared. A total of 35 patients received PVR-TIPS while 14 did not, with all receiving LT. Patients with PVR-TIPS had a higher Yerdel score and frequency of cavernoma than those that did not. PVR-TIPS was effective in decreasing portosystemic gradient (16 down to 8 mm HG; p < 0.05). Both groups allowed for end-to-end anastomoses in >90% of cases. However, veno-veno bypass was used significantly more in patients who did not receive PVR-TIPS. Additionally, patients without PVR-TIPS required significantly more intraoperative red blood cells. Overall survival was not different between groups. PVR-TIPS demonstrated efficacy in resolving PVT and allowed for end-to-end portal vein anastomoses. PVR-TIPS is a viable treatment option for chronic obliterative PVT with or without cavernoma that simplifies the surgical aspects of LT.

Imaging-guided interventions modulating portal venous flow: evidence and controversies

Portal hypertension is defined by an increase in the portosystemic venous gradient. In most cases, increased resistance to portal blood flow is the initial cause of elevated portal pressure. More than 90% of cases of portal hypertension are estimated to be due to advanced chronic liver disease or cirrhosis. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, a non-pharmacological treatment for portal hypertension, involve the placement of a stent between the portal vein and the hepatic vein or inferior vena cava which helps bypass hepatic resistance. Portal hypertension may also be a result of extrahepatic portal vein thrombosis or compression. In these cases, percutaneous portal vein recanalisation restores portal trunk patency, thus preventing portal hypertension-related complications. Any portal blood flow impairment leads to progressive parenchymal atrophy and triggers hepatic regeneration in preserved areas. This provides the rationale for using portal vein embolisation to modulate hepatic volume in preparation for extended hepatic resection. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive evidence-based review of the rationale for, and outcomes associated with, the main imaging-guided interventions targeting the portal vein, as well as to discuss the main controversies around such approaches.

Closure of Transsplenic Access Tracts Using Tract Embolics: Success, Clinical Outcomes, and Complications in a Tertiary Center

Purpose The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of transsplenic venous access closure.

Materials and Methods Twenty patients (mean age: 51.8 years; range: 28–72), underwent 21 transsplenic venous access procedures over 4 years in this retrospective study. Comorbidities, active hemorrhage, anticoagulation, coagulation parameters, platelets, indications for transsplenic access, needle gauge, sheath size, variceal embolization method, tract embolization method, bleeding complications, and transfusion requirements and additional procedures to manage bleeding complications were recorded.

Results Preprocedure comorbidities included portal hypertension (n = 18/20, 90%), portal vein thrombosis (n = 14/20, 70%), hemorrhage (n = 6/20, 30%), splenic vein thrombosis (n = 7/20, 35%), anticoagulation (n = 2/20, 10%), and sinistral portal hypertension (n = 2/20,10%). Mean baseline international normalized ratio was 1.3 (range: 1–1.9), platelets 122 (range: 18–492). Most common transsplenic access indications were gastric varices with nonpatent portosystemic shunt (n = 11/21, 52%) and portal vein targeting for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (n = 8, 38%). Most common access sheath sizes were 4-French (n = 5, 24%) and 6-French (n = 6, 29%). Fifteen procedures (71%) involved variceal embolization. Transsplenic tracts were embolized with microfibrillar collagen alone (n = 7), coils and microfibrillar collagen (n = 8), or others (n = 6). Based on the Society of Interventional Radiology adverse event classification system, embolization complications included one major (splenic artery pseudoaneurysm and a splenic vein pseudoaneurysm) and three moderate (19%) adverse bleeding events, which required blood transfusion.

Conclusion Transsplenic venous access tract embolization is a safe and moderately effective method to achieve tract hemostasis, with an overall clinical failure rate of 20%.

Percutaneous Transsplenic Balloon-Assisted Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Placement in Patients with Portal Vein Obliteration for Portal Vein Recanalization: Feasibility, Safety and Effectiveness

Purpose

To assess the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of portal vein recanalization (PVR)–transjugular portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement via splenic access using a balloon puncture technique.

Materials and Methods

In a single-center retrospective study from March 2017 to February 2021, 14 consecutive patients with portal hypertension, chronic liver disease and portal vein occlusion or near-complete (> 95%) occlusion were referred for PVR–TIPS placement. Feasibility, safety and effectiveness including procedural characteristics such as technical success, complication profile and splenic access time (SAT), balloon positioning time (BPT), conventional portal vein entry time (CPVET), overall procedure time (OPT), fluoroscopy time (FT), dose–area product (DAP) and air kerma (AK) were evaluated.

Results

Transsplenic PVR–TIPS using balloon puncture technique was technically feasible in 12 of 14 patients (8 men, 49 ± 13 years). In two patients without detectable intrahepatic portal vein branches, TIPS placement was not feasible and both patients were referred for further treatment with nonselective beta blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation. No complications grade > 3 of the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe classification system occurred. The SAT was 25 ± 21 min, CPVET was 33 ± 26 min, the OPT was 158 ± 54 min, the FT was 42 ± 22 min, the DAP was 167.84 ± 129.23 Gy*cm² and the AK was 1150.70 ± 910.73 mGy.

Conclusions

Transsplenic PVR–TIPS using a balloon puncture technique is feasible and appears to be safe in our series of patients with obliteration of the portal vein. It expands the interventional options in patients with chronic PVT.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00270-021-03054-2.

TIPS for Adults Without Cirrhosis With Chronic Mesenteric Venous Thrombosis and EHPVO Refractory to Standard-of-Care Therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Extrahepatic portal vein occlusion (EHPVO) from portal vein thrombosis is a rare condition associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) for the treatment of chronic EHPVO, cavernomatosis, and mesenteric venous thrombosis in adults without cirrhosis who are refractory to standard-of-care therapy.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients with chronic EHPVO received TIPS. Laboratory parameters and follow-up were assessed at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, and every 6 months thereafter. Two hepatologists adjudicated symptom improvement attributable to mesenteric thrombosis and EHPVO before/after TIPS. Kaplan-Meier was used to assess primary and overall TIPS patency, assessing procedural success. Adverse events, radiation exposure, hospital length-of-stay and patency were recorded. Cavernoma was present in 100%, with TIPS being successful in all cases using splenic, mesenteric, and transhepatic approaches. Symptom improvement was noted in 26 of 30 (87%) at 6-month follow-up. Twelve patients (31%) experienced TIPS thrombosis. There were no significant long-term laboratory adverse events or deaths. At 36 months, freedom from primary TIPS thrombosis was 63%; following secondary interventions, overall patency was increased to 81%.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS in chronic, noncirrhotic EHPVO with cavernomas and mesenteric venous thrombosis is technically feasible and does not adversely affect liver function. Most patients demonstrate subjective and objective benefit from TIPS. Improvement in patency rates are needed with proper timing of adjuvant anticoagulation.

Comparison of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Treatment of Cirrhosis With or Without Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Retrospective Study

Aim: The purpose of our study was to conduct a retrospective analysis to compare the effectiveness of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) in the treatment of patients with cirrhosis with or without portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

Methods: We included a total of 203 cirrhosis patients successfully treated with TIPS between January 2015 and January 2018, including 72 cirrhosis patients with PVT (35.5%) and 131 without PVT (64.5%). Our subjects were followed for at least 1 year after treatment with TIPS. Data were collected to estimate the mortality, shunt dysfunction, and complication rates after TIPS creation.

Results: During the mean follow-up time of 19.5 ± 12.8 months, 21 (10.3%) patients died, 15 (7.4%) developed shunt dysfunction, and 44 (21.6%) experienced overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE). No significant differences in mortality (P = 0.134), shunt dysfunction (P = 0.214), or OHE (P = 0.632) were noted between the groups. Age, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and refractory ascites requiring TIPS were risk factors for mortality. A history of diabetes, percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization (PTVE), 8-mm diameter stent, and platelet (PLT) increased the risk of shunt dysfunction. The prevalence of variceal bleeding and recurrent ascites was comparable between the two groups (16.7 vs. 16.7% P = 0.998 and 2.7 vs. 3.8% P = 0.678, respectively).

Conclusions: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts are feasible in the management of cirrhosis with PVT. No significant differences in survival or shunt dysfunction were noted between the PVT and no-PVT groups. The risk of recurrent variceal bleeding, recurrent ascites, and OHE in the PVT group was generally similar to that in the no-PVT group. TIPS represents a potentially feasible treatment option in cirrhosis patients with PVT.

Portal Vein Thrombosis: Diagnosis and Endovascular Management

BACKGROUND

 Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a rare but severe entity that can cause clinically significant sequela such as worsening portal hypertension or mesenteric ischemia. Those cases refractory to medical management may be referred for endovascular intervention. Several technical considerations have been described in the literature, but a cohesive comparison of these multiple techniques is lacking.

METHODS

 The purpose of this article is to review the diagnosis and endovascular management of PVT, including areas in which further research is warranted.

RESULTS

 Cases of PVT can be readily diagnosed using ultrasound, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging. Treatment often begins with systemic anticoagulation and endovascular interventions may be used in selected cases. Determining the optimal approach to accessing the portal venous system depends on the underlying disease and chronicity of the thrombus and the degree of occlusion. Once access to the portal venous system is established, catheter-directed therapy may be performed to achieve recanalization.

CONCLUSION

 Despite the heterogeneity in patient presentation, cases of PVT can be readily diagnosed across several imaging modalities. Strategizing interventional approaches involves evaluation of the underlying disease and the chronicity of the thrombus.

KEY POINTS

  · This review will enable interventionalists to establish a framework for treating portal vein thrombosis by identifying patient risk factors and thrombus characteristics that determine patient management.. · The unique risks and benefits for transhepatic, transsplenic, and transmesenteric approaches for establishing portal venous access will be discussed.. · Advantages and complications of thrombolysis, thrombectomy, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation for treating portal vein thrombosis will be reviewed in detail based on our extensive institutional experience..

CITATION FORMAT

· Ju C, Li X, Gadani S et al. Portal Vein Thrombosis: Diagnosis and Endovascular Management. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2021; DOI: 10.1055/a-1642-0990.

Endovascular management of portal vein obstruction in hepatobiliary cancer patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article is to describe the procedural safety, technical success, and clinical success of endovascular management of portal and mesenteric venous obstruction in patients with hepatobiliary neoplasms.

METHODS

Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved HIPAA compliant retrospective review of 21 consecutive patients with hepatobiliary malignancies who underwent endovascular portal vein recanalization and stent placement between January 2012 and March 2020. Clinical diagnoses were pancreatic cancer (n = 19), colon cancer metastatic to the liver (n = 1), and cholangiocarcinoma (n = 1). Presenting signs and symptoms included: ascites, abdominal pain, abnormal liver function tests, diarrhea, and gastrointestinal bleeding. Stent patency and patient survival are presented with Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 100%. A transhepatic approach was used in 20 cases (95.2%); trans-splenic access in one. Primary stent patency was 95.2%, 84%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively. All stent occlusions were caused by tumor progression. A total of 80% of patients reported symptomatic improvement. Patient survival at 10 months was 40%. The early death rate was 4.76%. There were no bleeding complications from the percutaneous tracts.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular recanalization with stent placement is safe with high technical and clinical success.

Complications of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the era of the stent graft - What the interventionists need to know?

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is created between a hepatic vein (HV) and the portal vein (PV) to alleviate the symptoms of portal hypertension. Despite high procedural success rates, a myriad of complications may occur at every step of TIPS creation. These complications may be attributable to the procedure itself or the shunt. Portal vein puncture is the most challenging and rate-limiting step, with extrahepatic portal vein puncture being the most devastating tabletop complication. Hepatic encephalopathy is the most common shunt-related complication after TIPS. Unlike bare metallic stents, covered stents have a longer patency rate and lower incidence of TIPS dysfunction. Most of the TIPS dysfunction that occurs with stent-grafts is due to technical errors and mechanical factors. TIPS revision often requires a combination of angioplasty, mechanical thrombectomy, and thrombolytics with a need for additional stenting in some cases. This review article focuses on procedure and shunt-related complications, as well as preventive and management strategies.

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.

Anticoagulation and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt for the Management of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis: A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend anticoagulation as the mainstay of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) treatment in cirrhosis. However, because of the heterogeneity of PVT, anticoagulation alone does not always achieve satisfactory results. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate an individualized management algorithm using a wait-and-see strategy (i.e., no treatment), anticoagulation, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) to treat PVT in cirrhosis.

METHODS

Between February 2014 and June 2018, 396 consecutive patients with cirrhosis with nonmalignant PVT were prospectively included in a tertiary care center, of which 48 patients (12.1%) were untreated, 63 patients (15.9%) underwent anticoagulation, 88 patients (22.2%) underwent TIPS, and 197 patients (49.8%) received TIPS plus post-TIPS anticoagulation. The decision of treatment option mainly depends on the stage of liver disease (symptomatic portal hypertension or not) and degree and extension of thrombus.

RESULTS

During a median 31.7 months of follow-up period, 312 patients (81.3%) achieved partial (n = 25) or complete (n = 287) recanalization, with 9 (3.1%) having rethrombosis, 64 patients (16.2%) developed major bleeding (anticoagulation-related bleeding in 7 [1.8%]), 88 patients (22.2%) developed overt hepatic encephalopathy, and 100 patients (25.3%) died. In multivariate competing risk regression models, TIPS and anticoagulation were associated with a higher probability of recanalization. Long-term anticoagulation using enoxaparin or rivaroxaban rather than warfarin was associated with a decreased risk of rethrombosis and an improved survival, without increasing the risk of bleeding. However, the presence of complete superior mesenteric vein thrombosis was associated with a lower recanalization rate, increased risk of major bleeding, and poor prognosis.

DISCUSSION

In patients with cirrhosis with PVT, the individualized treatment algorithm achieves a high-probability recanalization, with low rates of portal hypertensive complications and adverse events.

Portal vein thrombosis: an overview of current treatment options

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a splanchnic vascular disorder characterised by a recent or chronic thrombotic occlusion of the portal venous system. Its aetiology is miscellaneous, and its management is demanding since PVT can play a critical role as far as morbidity and mortality are concerned. Indeed, PVT can develop as a complication of portal hypertension (PH), in association or not with advanced chronic liver disease, and aggravate its clinical consequences such as variceal bleeding and ascites. Furthermore, a diagnosis of PVT in a non-cirrhotic context can potentially reveal a previously unknown hypercoagulable condition, requiring further diagnostic steps and specific treatment in addition to anticoagulation. In addition to established therapeutic approaches, new strategies, including newer pharmacological treatments and interdisciplinary invasive procedures, gain more attention and have been increasingly introduced into clinical practice. This review aims at discussing the current knowledge in terms of treatment options for PVT.

Pfortaderthrombosen – therapeutische Möglichkeiten

Die Pfortaderthrombose ist eine seltene Erkrankung, die eine Thrombose im Zustromgebiet der Pfortader in die Leber beschreibt bzw. in der Leber selbst in den entsprechenden Pfortaderästen lokalisiert ist. Oftmals liegt bereits eine chronische Lebererkrankung bzw. ein Malignom der Leber selbst oder unmittelbar benachbart liegender Organe vor; die Pfortaderthrombose kann aber auch bei Patienten auftreten, die keine entsprechende Vorerkrankung haben. Bei jeder neu diagnostizierten Pfortaderthrombose gilt es zu entscheiden, ob unmittelbar oder im Verlauf eine radiologisch-interventionelle Rekanalisation vorgenommen wird oder ein rein konservativer Therapieversuch mit Antikoagulanzien erfolgt. Aber auch chirurgische Verfahren, wie eine Shuntanlage oder die Notwendigkeit einer Lebertransplantation, müssen hierbei berücksichtigt werden. Für diesen Therapiealgorithmus ist die Kontaktaufnahme mit einem entsprechenden Zentrum sinnvoll. Die Therapieentscheidung muss die Ursache der Pfortaderthrombose und die Begleiterkrankungen adäquat berücksichtigen.

Ruptured idiopathic hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm causing portal vein thrombosis with portal hypertension and variceal bleeding

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is an important cause of noncirrhotic portal hypertension. Noncancerous extrinsic compression of portal vein to drive PVT formation is rare, but important to identify. A 64-year-old female with idiopathic hepatic artery pseudoaneurysm (HAPA) rupture 7 months prior presented with acute-onset hematemesis and melena and was found to have prehepatic portal hypertensive variceal bleeding. Her HAPA-related retroperitoneal hematoma had resulted in portal vein compression, thrombosis, and cavernous transformation despite prompt stent graft placement across the ruptured HAPA, and required definitive treatment by transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation with portal vein reconstruction utilizing a trans-splenic access. This case highlights the importance of interval abdominal imaging and hypercoagulability screening for noncirrhotic patients at-risk for PVT, which identified the patient as a heterozygous carrier of Factor V Leiden.

Management of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

While portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequently encountered complication in the cirrhosis population, its management can be challenging for even the most experienced clinicians. Multiple factors must be considered with regards to management, including the degree of underlying portal hypertension and liver dysfunction, risks of therapies including anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement, and extent of the thrombosis. Interpreting the available literature to determine the best treatment strategy for any individual patient can be especially challenging given the lack of prospective, randomized controlled trials and the heterogeneity of cohorts studied. This review will provide an overview of PVT in the cirrhosis population, including necessary steps in evaluation and the potential benefits and drawbacks of different treatment approaches.

Percutaneous Ultrasound-Guided Superior and Inferior Mesenteric Vein Access for Portal Vein Recanalization-Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt: A Case Series

Objective

To describe the technique and outcomes of mesenteric access under ultrasound guidance to perform portal vein recanalization–transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS).

Methods

Four patients (3 male: 1 female, mean age: 46.2 years; range 38–64 years) with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and cavernous transformation were eligible for PVR-TIPS. Due to inaccessible splenic vein (one patient with history of splenectomy and 3 patients with unavailable splenic vein during the procedure), noninvasive direct puncture of superior (n = 3) and inferior (n = 1) mesenteric vein was conducted under ultrasound guidance to obtain access for PVR-TIPS.

Results

Trans-mesenteric access and PVR-TIPS were successful in all patients at first attempt. No immediate complication was observed following the procedures. Follow-up imaging with computed tomography (CT) scan and Doppler ultrasound revealed patent TIPS and portal venous vasculature in all patients.

Conclusion

Percutaneous noninvasive transmesenteric access is a feasible approach for PVR-TIPS in patients with inaccessible splenic veins.

Level of evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00270-020-02713-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Ex Vivo Cell Therapy by Ectopic Hepatocyte Transplantation Treats the Porcine Tyrosinemia Model of Acute Liver Failure

The effectiveness of cell-based therapies to treat liver failure is often limited by the diseased liver environment. Here, we provide preclinical proof of concept for hepatocyte transplantation into lymph nodes as a cure for liver failure in a large-animal model with hereditary tyrosinemia type 1 (HT1), a metabolic liver disease caused by deficiency of fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase (FAH) enzyme. Autologous porcine hepatocytes were transduced ex vivo with a lentiviral vector carrying the pig Fah gene and transplanted into mesenteric lymph nodes. Hepatocytes showed early (6 h) and durable (8 months) engraftment in lymph nodes, with reproduction of vascular and hepatic microarchitecture. Subsequently, hepatocytes migrated to and repopulated the native diseased liver. The corrected cells generated sufficient liver mass to clinically ameliorate the acute liver failure and HT1 disease as early as 97 days post-transplantation. Integration site analysis defined the corrected hepatocytes in the liver as a subpopulation of hepatocytes from lymph nodes, indicating that the lymph nodes served as a source for healthy hepatocytes to repopulate a diseased liver. Therefore, ectopic transplantation of healthy hepatocytes cures this pig model of liver failure and presents a promising approach for the development of cures for liver disease in patients.