Safety of direct-acting oral anticoagulants relative to warfarin in a matched cohort of liver transplant recipients

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Solid Organ Transplant Patients

Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is increasingly used to provide nonpharmacologic stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation, particularly patients at high risk for complications of anticoagulation. Randomized controlled trials establishing LAAO safety and efficacy excluded solid organ transplantation recipients; thus, the role of LAAO in these patients is poorly understood. We present a series of patients with a history of solid organ transplantation who underwent LAAO and include patient-level data on indication, safety, and long-term outcomes. Our cohort demonstrated excellent efficacy and procedural safety with successful implantation in all cases, no major periprocedural complications, and successful discontinuation of systemic anticoagulation.

Exploring safety and efficacy of rivaroxaban after living donor liver transplantation: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

Thromboembolic complications remain a significant concern in postoperative patients, particularly those who have undergone liver transplantation. Warfarin has been the standard oral anticoagulant. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have several advantages over warfarin, including rapid onset of action and standardized dose guidelines. We aimed to assess the safety of rivaroxaban in living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) recipients.

METHODS

This study was a single-center, retrospective descriptive analysis of LDLT recipients who received rivaroxaban between December 2020 and April 2022. A total of 27 recipients received rivaroxaban postoperatively. Liver function tests, immunosuppression levels, serum creatinine, and INR were recorded before the initiation of rivaroxaban and then on post-therapy days 1, 7, 14, 28, 90, and 180.

RESULTS

Among the 27 recipients receiving rivaroxaban postoperatively, portal venous thrombosis was the most prevalent indication for anticoagulation (44.4%), followed by Budd-Chiari syndrome (29.6%). Nine patients had a twofold increase in either ALT or AST values, two of whom were treated for biliary strictures and the others for rejection. Eighteen patients were given tacrolimus, and eight were on cyclosporine, with one patient switched from tacrolimus to cyclosporine due to insufficient therapeutic levels. There were no incidents of bleeding or re-thrombosis during the 180-day follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Rivaroxaban may be a safe and effective alternative in LDLT recipients with no significant adverse incidents. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings and determine this population's optimal dose and duration of rivaroxaban therapy.

Descriptive analysis evaluating the use of direct oral anticoagulation therapy in heart and lung transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are widely utilized following cardiothoracic transplantation with limited guidance regarding drug-drug interactions (DDIs), periprocedural management, and DOAC-specific monitoring.

METHODS

We performed a single-center, retrospective, descriptive analysis of adult cardiothoracic transplant recipients initiated on DOAC therapy between May 2016 and July 2021. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the percentage of patients dosed per package labeling. Secondary endpoints included DOAC prescribing in the context of DDIs, renal dysfunction, and periprocedural management, as well as thromboembolism and major bleeding at 12 months.

RESULTS

A total of 125 patients were included in this analysis with a median age of 62 years. At initiation, 63.2% of patients were dosed according to package labeling. The most common reason for non-labeled dosing was concomitant azole antifungal therapy. DOAC therapy was held for 82 procedures with no reported thrombotic events and one major bleed in the setting of AKI. Hemodialysis-dependence was associated with a reduced risk of thrombosis (0 vs. 10 events per 100 PY, p = .002) and an increased risk of major bleeding (23 vs. 8 events per 100 PY, p = .006). Additionally, DOAC-specific anti-xa guided dosing was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding (0 vs. 13 events per 100 PY, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings show that deviation from package labeling is common following cardiothoracic transplantation and its association with clinical outcomes warrants further study.

A Review of Direct-acting Oral Anticoagulants and Their Use in Solid Organ Transplantation

Direct-acting oral anticoagulant (DOAC) use has increased dramatically since their introduction because of the growing evidence of proven efficacy and enhanced safety compared with warfarin and the low-molecular-weight heparins in the general population. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of quality data regarding the safety and efficacy of the DOACs in patients awaiting organ transplant and those who received a solid organ transplant. This review aims to evaluate the available literature and considerations regarding anticoagulation use in transplant recipients, focusing on preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative DOAC use.

Pharmacokinetics of Apixaban and Tacrolimus or Cyclosporine in Kidney and Lung Transplant Recipients

Apixaban is frequently used off‐label in transplant recipients. However, a potential drug interaction exists with the calcineurin inhibitors. We conducted an open‐label drug–drug interaction study to determine the pharmacokinetics of apixaban in lung and kidney transplant recipients who were taking a calcineurin inhibitor. A single dose of apixaban 10 mg was administered orally to kidney and lung transplant recipients maintained on either tacrolimus or cyclosporine, and pharmacokinetic parameters were compared to a reference cohort of 12 healthy subjects who used the same apixaban dose and pharmacokinetic blood sampling. Fourteen participants were enrolled (n = 6 kidney, n = 8 lung), with 10 maintained on tacrolimus and four on cyclosporine. Data from 13 participants was usable. Participants were taking triple therapy immunosuppression and had a mean (SD) of 12 (3) medications. Participants receiving tacrolimus and cyclosporine had area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC_0‐inf) geometric least square means (90% confidence interval [CI]) of 4312 (95% CI 3682, 5049) and 5388 (95% CI 3277, 8858), respectively. Compared to healthy subjects, the associated geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for apixaban maximum plasma concentration (C_max), AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC_0‐tlast) and AUC_0‐inf were 197% (95% CI 153, 295), 244% (95% CI 184, 323), and 224% (95% CI 170, 295) for transplant recipients on tacrolimus. The GMR (90% CI) C_max, AUC_0‐tlast, and AUC_0‐inf of apixaban for patients on cyclosporine were 256% (95% CI 184, 358), 287% (95% CI 198, 415), and 280% (95% CI 195, 401). Kidney and lung transplant recipients receiving tacrolimus had higher apixaban exposure. A similar trend was noted for patients receiving cyclosporine, but additional patients are needed to confirm this interaction. Future studies are needed before apixaban can be safely recommended in this population, and the impact of dose staggering should be investigated. This study highlights the importance of pharmacokinetic studies in actual patient populations.

The Use of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Post-Kidney Transplantation, Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are widely used alternatives to warfarin, because they do not require routine monitoring and have better safety profile. There is limited experience for NOACs in organ transplant recipients.

METHODS

This study assessed NOAC safety and efficacy among renal transplant recipients in a single center. A retrospective matched cohort study was conducted among the adult renal transplant recipients concomitantly administered calcineurin inhibitors (tacrolimus or cyclosporin) and NOACs between November 2015 and December 2019.

RESULTS

The study included 16 patients divided into 2 equal groups on NOACs and warfarin. Male patients constitute 50% and 75% of the NOAC group and warfarin group, respectively, and 75% and 87.5% of cases are post living donor transplants in the NOAC group and warfarin group, respectively. In the NOAC group, the most common indication for anticoagulation was atrial fibrillation (62.5%), followed by deep vein thrombosis (37.5%), whereas in the warfarin group, the most common indication was atrial fibrillation (50%), followed by valve replacement (25%). In the NOAC group, 6 patients (75%) received rivaroxaban, 1 patient (12.5%) received dabigatran, and 1 patient (12.5%) received apixaban; 68.75% of patients were on a tacrolimus-based regimen. There were no thromboembolic events, rejection episodes, bleeding, or admissions due to NOAC adverse events. There were 3 cases of bleeding in the warfarin group. Calcineurin inhibitor levels and estimated glomerular filtration rate did not change significantly in the NOAC group (P = .34 and .96, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to warfarin, NOACs are well tolerated and effective for preventing and treating thromboembolic events in renal transplant recipients. A larger randomized controlled study is required.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in solid organ transplant recipients: A meta-analysis

There is limited evidence comparing direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. We performed a pooled analysis to study the safety and efficacy of DOACs in this patient population. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases using the search terms "heart transplant" or "lung transplant" or "liver transplant" or "kidney transplant" or "pancreas transplant" and "direct oral anticoagulant" for literature search. Random effects model with Mantel-Haenszel method was used to pool the outcomes. Pooled analysis included 489 patients, of which 259 patients received DOACs and 230 patients received warfarin. When compared to warfarin, the use of DOACs was associated with decreased risk of composite bleed (RR .49, 95% CI .32-.76, p = .002). There were no differences in rates of major bleeding (RR .55, 95% CI .20-1.49, p = .24) or venous thromboembolism (RR .65, 95% CI .25-1.70, p = .38) between the two groups. Evidence from pooled analysis suggests that DOACs are comparable to warfarin in terms of safety in SOT recipients. Further research is warranted to conclusively determine whether DOACs are safe alternatives to warfarin for anticoagulation in SOT recipients.

Less bleeding associated with apixaban versus other direct acting oral anticoagulation in solid organ transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes of bleeding and thrombosis resulting from the use of DOACs in a large cohort of SOT recipients.

METHODS

This was a single center, retrospective cohort study of adult kidney, heart, lung, and liver transplant recipients transplanted between August 2009 and May 2018. Patients were stratified into two groups: those who received apixaban (apixaban group) or those patients receiving either rivaroxaban or dabigatran (non-apixaban group). The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of bleeding while receiving DOAC therapy. The secondary endpoints were incidence of major bleeding and thrombosis at any time while receiving DOAC therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients were included; 70 patients received apixaban and 36 patients received non-apixaban anticoagulation. Cumulative incidence of any bleeding was lower in the apixaban group compared to the non-apixaban group at both 90 days (4.9% versus 16.1%) and 180 days (11.4% versus 24.9%, P = 0.034). Cumulative incidence of major bleeding (P = 0.686) and thrombosis (P = 0.515) were similar between groups. DOAC dosing congruent with the package insert(s) was associated with a lower risk of thrombosis.

CONCLUSION

Apixaban-based anticoagulation was associated with a lower cumulative incidence of any bleeding compared to non-apixaban DOACs. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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.

Use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants in solid organ transplantation: A systematic review

The use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has increased secondary to the mounting evidence for comparable efficacy and potentially superior safety to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in the general population. However, insufficient data regarding DOAC use in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients and numerous pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations limit their use in this highly selected patient population. A systematic review of recent clinical evidence on the safety and efficacy of DOACs compared to VKAs in SOT recipients was conducted. Additional considerations including transplant-specific strategies for DOAC reversal and common pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic concerns were also reviewed. Although current evidence is limited to single-center retrospective analyses, DOACs, especially apixaban, appear to be a safe and effective alternative to VKAs for SOT recipients with stable graft function and without drug-drug interactions. Reliable data on DOAC reversal at the time of transplant surgery are lacking, and clinicians should consider idarucizumab, andexanet alfa, and other non-specific reversal agents on an individual patient basis. There is no evidence supporting deviations from the Food and Drug Administration labeling recommendations for DOAC dosing in the setting of drug-drug interactions, obesity, and renal function, especially in patients on hemodialysis.