Is Post-TIPS Anticoagulation Therapy Necessary in Patients with Cirrhosis and Portal Vein Thrombosis? A Randomized Controlled Trial

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

Objectives

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

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

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

French guidelines on TIPS: Indications and modalities

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has become essential in the treatment or prevention of portal hypertension-related complications. In the early 1990s, the primary indication was refractory bleeding. It is now proposed for the treatment of ascites for the prevention of bleeding and in patients with vascular diseases of the liver. Thus, there are a growing number of patients being treated with TIPS all over the world. The broadening of indications, the involvement of multiple stakeholders, the need for an accurate selection, the positioning in relation to transplantation and the lack of standardization in pre-therapeutic assessment, in the procedure itself and in the follow-up have led the board of the French Association for the Study of the Liver to establish recommendations.

Management of Nonmalignant Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

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

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension with chronic portal vein occlusion

PURPOSE

This study aims to evaluate the long-term patency of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and determine the predictors of shunt dysfunction in patients with chronic portal vein occlusion (CPVO).

METHOD

This retrospective study was conducted from December 2010 to December 2020 in patients with portal hypertension and CPVO. Patients were followed up from initial TIPS insertion to December 2022 or death. Details of TIPS procedure, adverse events and clinical outcomes were recorded. The cumulative rate of shunt patency was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by using the log-rank test. Independent predictors of shunt dysfunction were calculated with the Cox regression model. A nomogram comprising independent variables was developed to enhance the predictive accuracy of shunt patency.

RESULTS

One hundred six patients (mean age, 45.3 years ± 13.6; 71 males and 35 females) were enrolled in the study. TIPS procedure was technically successful in 100 of 106 patients (94.3 %). The primary shunt patency rates for all 100 patients were 78.9 %, 74.7 %, 67.2 %, and 62.4 % at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively, and the overall shunt patency rates were 88.9 %, 86.8 %, 83.6 %, and 81.2 % at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months, respectively. Independent predictor of shunt dysfunction were inadequate inflow from superior mesenteric vein or splenic vein (the maximum diameter < 8 mm) and platelet count ≥ 300 × 109/L. The developed nomogram is a simple tool for accurately predicting shunt patency.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CPVO, inadequate inflow and high platelet count are important factors for TIPS dysfunction.

[Splanchnic vein thrombosis]

Splanchnic vein thrombosis includes Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis. These diseases share common features: (i) they are rare diseases and (ii) they can lead to portal hypertension and its complications. Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in the absence of underlying liver disease share many risk factors, the most common being myeloproliferative neoplasms. A rapid and comprehensive workup for thrombosis risk factors is necessary in these patients. Long-term anticoagulation is indicated in most patients. Portal vein thrombosis can also develop in patients with cirrhosis, and is associated with a worse course of cirrhosis. Indications for anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis are increasing. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is a second-line procedure in this setting. Because of the rarity of these diseases, high-level evidence studies are rare. However, collaborative studies have provided a better understanding of their natural history and allowed to improve the management of these patients. This review focuses on the causes, diagnosis, and management of patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome, patients with portal vein thrombosis without underlying liver disease, and patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis.

Anticoagulation against portal vein thrombosis reduces mortality and liver cirrhosis-related complications: A propensity score-matched study

AIM

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is one of the common complications of liver cirrhosis. Although anticoagulation contributes to thrombus resolution and is considered the first-choice treatment, its impact on patients' prognosis is still controversial. This study aimed to clarify the benefit of anticoagulation on mortality, liver function, and the incidence of liver cirrhosis-related complications in cirrhotic PVT patients.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective review in which we included 78 eligible patients with PVT out of 439. After propensity score matching, 21 cirrhotic PVT patients were included in each one of the untreated control and anticoagulation groups.

RESULTS

Overall survival was significantly improved in the anticoagulation group compared with the control group (p = 0.041), along with PVT size reduction (53.3% vs. 108.2%, p = 0.009). At the time of CT follow-up, the anticoagulation group showed a lower ALBI score (p = 0.037) and its prevalence of massive ascites was significantly lower (p = 0.043) compared with the control group. The incidence of overt encephalopathy was also lower in the anticoagulation group (p = 0.041). The cumulative incidence of bleeding events did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulation improves the survival of patients with cirrhotic PVT. Preserved liver function and reduced risks of cirrhosis-related complications under the treatment may have contributed to a better prognosis. Given its efficacy and safety, anticoagulation is worth initiating in patients with PVT.

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.

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.

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 for the Treatment of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

Background

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) leads to significant morbidity and mortality burden in patients with cirrhosis. An improved understanding of the utility of anticoagulation in patients with PVT will aid clinical decision making and inform future research. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the association between anticoagulation therapy and clinical outcomes in the context of treatment for PVT in cirrhosis.

Methods

Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to February 13, 2022, for studies comparing the use of anticoagulation to other modalities as treatment for PVT in cirrhosis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated using a random-effects model for PVT improvement, recanalization, progression, bleeding events, and all-cause mortality in treatment studies.

Results

We identified 944 records, of which 16 studies (n = 1126) examining anticoagulation as PVT treatment were included for subsequent analysis. Anticoagulation as PVT treatment was associated with PVT improvement (OR 3.64; 95% CI 2.56-5.17), PVT recanalization (OR 3.73; 95% CI 2.45-5.68), decreased PVT progression (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.23-0.63), and decreased all-cause mortality (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.29-0.75). The use of anticoagulation was not associated with bleeding events (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.39-1.66). All analyses demonstrated low heterogeneity.

Conclusions

These results support the use of anticoagulation in cirrhosis as treatment for PVT. These findings may inform the clinical management of PVT and highlight the need for further studies such as large randomized controlled trials characterizing the safety and efficacy of anticoagulation for PVT in cirrhosis.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: A literature review

Portal Vein Thrombosis (PVT), a common complication of advanced liver disease, is defined as an obstruction of the portal vein due to thrombus formation that can extend to the superior mesenteric and splenic veins. It was believed that PVT occurred predominantly due to prothrombotic potential. However, recent studies have shown that decreased blood flow related to portal hypertension appears to increase PVT risk as per Virchow's triad. It is well known that there is a higher incidence of PVTs in cirrhosis with a higher MELD and Child Pugh score. The controversy for management of PVTs in cirrhotics lies in the individualized assessment of risks versus benefits of anticoagulation, since these patients have a complex hemostatic profile with both bleeding and procoagulant propensities. In this review, we will systematically compile the etiology, pathophysiology, clinical features, and management of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.

Combined transjugular/percutaneous intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (cTIPS) for cavernous transformation of the portal vein after conventional transjugular approach TIPS failure

This study aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of combined transjugular/percutaneous intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (cTIPS) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in cirrhotic patients with cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV) after conventional transjugular approach TIPS failure. Cirrhotic patients who were diagnosed as CTPV and treated by cTIPS or TIPS between July 2012 and April 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients' characteristics and clinical data were recorded. The clinical outcomes, long-term survival rates and patency rates between the 2 groups were compared. A total of 68 patients with CTPV were enrolled, of whom 23 were treated with TIPS and 45 with cTIPS. The initial technical success was 30.9% in TIPS group and 91.1% in cTIPS group. The hospitalization days increased significantly in the cTIPS group compared with TIPS group (P = .0131). However, the complication rate, patency rates and survival rates were similar between the 2 groups. In conclusion, cTIPS appeared to be safe and effective in cirrhotic patients with CTPV after conventional transjugular approach TIPS failure.

Management of splanchnic vein thrombosis

The expression splanchnic vein thrombosis encompasses Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis. These disorders have common characteristics: they are both rare diseases which can cause portal hypertension and its complications. Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in the absence of underlying liver disease share many risk factors, among which myeloproliferative neoplasms represent the most common; a rapid comprehensive work-up for risk factors of thrombosis is needed in these patients. Long-term anticoagulation is indicated in most patients. Portal vein thrombosis can also develop in patients with cirrhosis and in those with porto-sinusoidal vascular liver disease. The presence and nature of underlying liver disease impacts the management of portal vein thrombosis. Indications for anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis are growing, while transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is now a second-line option. Due to the rarity of these diseases, studies yielding high-grade evidence are scarce. However, collaborative studies have provided new insight into the management of these patients. This article focuses on the causes, diagnosis, and management of patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome, portal vein thrombosis without underlying liver disease, or cirrhosis with non-malignant portal vein thrombosis.

Mid- to long-term outcomes of initial transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt versus anticoagulation for pyrrolizidine alkaloid-induced hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome

BACKGROUND

Anticoagulation therapy (AT) is often used as the initial treatment for pyrrolizidine alkaloid (PA)-induced hepatic sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (HSOS). However, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an alternative treatment. This study aimed to determine the mid- to long-term outcomes of TIPS versus AT as the initial treatment for PA-induced HSOS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 61 patients with PA-induced HSOS that were collected between November 2015 and July 2021. The patients were allocated to the TIPS group ( n = 20) or the AT group ( n = 41). These two groups were divided into subgroups according to the severity grading. The clinical data of the patients in both groups were analyzed. Cumulative survival rates were calculated and compared between the two groups and among the subgroups.

RESULTS

The clinical symptoms and signs improved or stabilized in 100% of the patients following TIPS and in 85% of the patients following AT at discharge ( P = 0.166). The mortality rate was 0.0% in the TIPS group and 34.1% in the AT group ( P = 0.005). The patients were followed up for 2-69 months (mean, 26.3 ± 20.5 months). In the mild- and moderate-grade subgroups, there was no difference in the cumulative survival rate between the TIPS and AT groups ( P = 0.589 and P = 0.364, respectively). In the severe and very severe-grade subgroups, the cumulative survival rate was higher in the TIPS group than in the AT group ( P = 0.018 and P = 0.025, respectively).

CONCLUSION

AT is a suitable initial treatment for mild or moderate PA-induced HSOS, whereas TIPS should be considered the appropriate initial treatment for severe or very severe PA-induced HSOS.

Status of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension in China: A national survey analysis

Aim

The transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure has been performed in China for 30 years, but our understanding of the status and difficulties associated with the use of TIPS for portal hypertension is incomplete. This study aims to investigate the current situation of the use of TIPS for portal hypertension, which should aid the development of TIPS in China.

Methods

This study involved a questionnaire survey, initiated by the China Portal Hypertension Alliance (CHESS) to investigate the use of TIPS for portal hypertension in China. Questionnaires were released on the Internet between August 16, 2022 and September 16, 2022. Detailed information was collected from 545 hospitals contracted by the CHESS in China, which performed TIPS surgery in 2021.

Results

The 545 hospitals covers the majority of hospitals in China that conduct TIPS intervention. In the survey, a total of 13,527 TIPS interventions were carried out with 94.1% (498/545) of them had a system of routine follow‐up after TIPS. The majority (42.6% [232/545]) believed that the main indication of TIPS was the control of acute bleeding. Overall, 48.1% (262/545) carried out early or pre‐emptive TIPS, 53.0% (289/545) carried out TIPS for cavernous transformation of the portal vein, and 81.0% (441/545) chose routine embolization of collateral circulation during operation. Most used coils (97.0% [475/490]) and biological glue (72.0% [353/490]) as embolic materials, and 78.5% (428/545) routinely performed intraoperative portal pressure gradient measurements. When selecting TIPS stents, 57.1% (311/545) chose viator‐specific stents, and 57.2% (312/545) chose conventional anticoagulation after TIPS. Conventional anticoagulation after TIPS is over a time interval of 3–6 months (55.4% [173/312]). The limitation of TIPS surgery is mainly its cost (72.3% [394/545]) and insufficient understanding of the procedure by doctors in other related departments (77.4% [422/545]). Most of the hospital teams accept the use of domestic instruments in TIPS surgery (92.7% [505/545]).

Conclusions

This survey shows that TIPS is an essential part of the treatment of portal hypertension in China. TIPS is widely used in Chinese patients with portal hypertension, and this survey presents a more comprehensive picture of the options and difficulties encountered in the implementation of TIPS. In the future, it is necessary to promote TIPS technology and further standardize surgical indications, routine operations, and instrument application.

The effects and safety of anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy following TIPS in cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension: A meta-analysis

Introduction: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is an effective way to improve portal hypertension, however, the role of anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy following TIPS remains controversial. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy following TIPS. Methods: A literature search was conducted on anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy after TIPS using Pubmed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane. The retrieval period was from the earliest accessible date in the database to 31 October 2022. We collected information on the incidence of stent dysfunction, bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, the new occurrence of portal vein thrombosis, and the survival rate. Stata was analyzed in RevMan. Results: 1. Four studies received anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy after TIPS without control groups. According to the single-group rate meta-analysis, stent dysfunction occurred at 27% [95% CI (0.19, 0.38)], bleeding occurred at 21% [95% CI (0.14, 0.29)], new portal vein thrombosis occurred at 17% [(95%CI(0.04.0.71)], hepatic encephalopathy occurred at 47% [95%CI (0.34, 0.63)], and death occurred at 31% [95% CI (0.22, 0.42)]. 2. Eight studies, including 1025 patients, compared anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy after TIPS to TIPS alone. In terms of stent dysfunction, bleeding, and hepatic encephalopathy, there were no significant differences between the two groups. The use of anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy may result in a significant decrease in the incidence of new portal vein thrombosis and mortality over 1 year. Discussion: Anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy may not improve the patency rate of TIPS, but may effectively prevent new portal vein thrombosis after TIPS. Following TIPS, the use of anticoagulants or antiplatelet drugs does not lead to an increase in bleeding or death.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

AREAS COVERED

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

EXPERT OPINION

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

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.

Review article: the safety of anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents in patients with cirrhosis

Patients with cirrhosis were long thought to be coagulopathic. However, this paradigm has changed in recent years and currently, cirrhosis is recognised as a prothrombotic state. Due to the increasing incidence of cirrhosis from nonalcoholic steatohepatitis which is closely associated with cardiac disease, patients with cirrhosis increasingly require therapy with anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents. However, their potential for causing catastrophic and life-threatening bleeding in patients with cirrhosis leads to hesitancy about their use in patients with cirrhosis. Overall, traditional anticoagulation is safe for all Child-Pugh classes while newer direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are mostly safe in Child-Pugh class A/B and contraindicated in severe hepatic impairment. For different indications, published data to date suggest that anticoagulation is overall safe for patients with cirrhosis who have venous thromboembolism, atrial fibrillation and portal vein thrombosis, and does not increase the risk of variceal bleeding. Moreover, DOACs appear to have similar safety profiles as traditional anticoagulants. Finally, most studies suggest that antiplatelet agents are also safe to use in patients with cirrhosis although they are mostly contraindicated in severe hepatic impairment. For both anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents, severe thrombocytopaenia presents a relative contraindication to their use. More prospective trials and large cohort studies are needed to advance our understanding of the safety and nuances of DOACs and antiplatelet agents in patients with advanced cirrhosis.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension: 30 years experience from China

Liver diseases are a major cause of illness and death worldwide. In China, liver diseases, primarily viral hepatitis, affect approximately 300 million people, thus having a major impact on the global burden of liver diseases. Portal hypertension is the most severe complication of chronic liver diseases, including ascites, hepatic encephalopathy and bleeding from gastroesophageal varices. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) represents a very effective treatment of these complications. Since its introduction 30 years ago in China, the use of TIPS has evolved and has played an increasingly important role in the management of the complications of portal hypertension. This review will focus on the history, current application and management of complications of TIPS in China.

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.

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.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for the prevention of rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been performed on patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) to prevent rebleeding; however, the associated evidence is scarce. Hence, the study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of TIPS in patients with cirrhosis and PVT and promote personalized treatment in such patients.

Methods: Literature was systematically obtained from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Data from the included studies were extracted, and meta-analyses by the random effects model were used to pool data across studies. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I² statistics. The source of heterogeneity was explored using subgroup analyses and meta-regressions.

Results: A total of 11 studies comprising 703 patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT: complete, 32.2%; chronic, 90.2%; superior mesenteric vein or splenic vein involvement, 55.2%; cavernous transformation, 26.8%) were included. TIPS showed feasibility in 95% of the cases (95% confidence interval [CI]: 89%–99%) with heterogeneity (I² = 84%, p < 0.01) due to cavernous transformation. The pooled rebleeding rate was 13% (95% CI: 7%–20%) with heterogeneity (I² = 75%, p < 0.01) explained by chronic PVT and anticoagulation (AC) therapy. Hepatic encephalopathy occurred in 32% of patients. The survival rate, portal vein recanalization rate, and shunt patency rate were 80%, 82%, and 77%, respectively.

Conclusion: TIPS is feasible and effectively prevents rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and PVT, regardless of cavernous transformation of the portal vein. Due to a potentially high risk of rebleeding and no apparent benefits of AC, post-TIPS AC must be employed cautiously.

Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=258765], identifier [CRD42021258765].

Pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease patients-pathogenesis, risk factors, and implications on management

Along with the worldwide increase in obesity and metabolic syndrome, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and its more severe subset, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), are on path to become the leading cause of liver transplantation in the United States. NAFLD, as well as obesity, create an inflammatory milieu via the release of adipocytokines. In turn, the inflammatory environment can trigger an increase in prothrombotic factors. Independent of inflammation, the severity of NASH is associated with a graded increase in hypercoagulability such as an increase in factor VIII, increase in plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, and decrease in protein C. Ultimately, this environment creates an increase in thrombotic risk, leading to higher rates of pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with NASH cirrhosis vesus other causes of cirrhosis. Many studies have shown worse outcomes in liver transplant recipients with PVT as it complicates anastomotic reconstruction which can negatively affect portal blood supply needed for adequate liver functioning. Management and treatment of PVT is not standardized, but from a pharmacologic standpoint, multiple classes of anticoagulants have shown to be successful in recanalization of the portal vein and preventing recurrence of clot with minimal bleeding complications. The increasing prevalence of NASH cirrhosis and subsequent increase in PVT require further research for improved outcomes.

Anticoagulation after transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension: A systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is widely applied to decrease portal hypertension. Because of the lack of strong evidence, it is controversial whether anticoagulation should be performed after TIPS. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of anticoagulation for patients with portal hypertension following TIPS.

METHODS

Studies making comparisons between combination treatment and TIPS alone were searched in China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Cochrane Library, PubMed, the Wan Fang electronic databases, and EMBASE, delivered between the earliest accessible date and September 4, 2021. The RevMan version 5.3 was applied to conduct all statistical analyses. I2 index statistic was used to assess heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Five eligible studies were selected, and total 707 patients were enrolled. According to the meta-analysis, compared to TIPS alone, TIPS + anticoagulation led to much lower incidence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT; odds ratio [OR] = 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.18-0.84, P = .02) as well as low heterogeneity (P = 0.36, I2 = 3%). Other index like the stent dysfunction rate (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.71-2.77, P = .42), bleeding rate (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.71-2.77, P = .42), and incidence of hepatic encephalopathy (OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.56-1.36, P = .55) showed no statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

In certain patients with portal hypertension, anticoagulation following TIPS may not be required. However, for patients who do not have a PVT before TIPS, post-TIPS anticoagulation can decrease the incidence of PVT. Nonetheless, further research is still required.

Cirrhosis and Coagulopathy: Mechanisms of Hemostasis Changes in Liver Failure and Their Management

Cirrhosis is an end-stage liver disease that can cause changes in any component of the hemostatic system. The net effects of the complicated hemostatic changes have long been unknown due to concurrent changes in pro-and antihemostatic drivers. Coagulation disorders are caused by various factors, including decreased clotting and inhibitor factor synthesis, reduced clearance of activated factors, quantitative and qualitative platelet defects, hyperfibrinolysis, and increased intravascular coagulation. This review discusses the pathogenesis of coagulopathy and multiple studies related to its clinical presentations. This article also highlights an additional problem in the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to this group of patients: the fact that traditional coagulation tests and transfusional strategies may not be reliable for assessing and managing bleeding or thrombotic risks. Hence, multiple management options have been assessed for bleeding and thrombosis in liver disease.

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.

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 In Cirrhosis: Interventional Treatment Options

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent consequence of cirrhosis and its management is variable and controversial. Herein we highlight interventional treatment options and outcomes, together with mention of the physiology, presentation and imaging of PVT.

RECENT FINDINGS

Utilization of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for acute and chronic PVT is expanding. In acute PVT, TIPS improves hepatopetal flow which promotes thrombus resorption and prevents rethrombosis. The TIPS also functions as a conduit for thrombectomy devices and allows for embolization of variceal shunts. Chronic PVT is a relative contraindication to liver transplant. Portal vein recanalization (PVR) TIPS restores flow in a previously occluded portal vein, allowing for a conventional end-to-end portal vein anastomosis at transplant. PVR TIPS is technically demanding and often requires percutaneous splenic vein access for portal venous recanalization. Selection of endovascular PVT treatment varies with the age (acute or chronic) and the extent of thrombus, along with presenting symptoms and transplant candidacy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of anticoagulation therapy for portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis: to treat or not to treat?

PURPOSE

To date, the optimal treatment for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhotic patients has not been established in guidelines or consensus. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of anticoagulation therapy in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (until 31st October 2020) for studies evaluating the effect of anticoagulation therapy on treating PVT in patients with cirrhosis. Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies were included in the analysis, comprising 6005 patients. Of these, three were prospective cohort studies, nine were retrospective cohort studies and one was case-control study. Compared to no treatment, anticoagulation therapy was associated with higher rates of PVT recanalization (OR 4.29; 95% CI 3.01-6.13). Anticoagulation therapy demonstrated a significant 74% reduction in PVT extension compared to no treatment (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.14-0.49). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of death (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.20-1.40). However, anticoagulation therapy was associated with slightly higher risk of bleeding compared to no treatment (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.02-1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

In cirrhotic patients with PVT, anticoagulation therapy helps increase rate of PVT recanalization and improve survival, but may also carry higher risks of bleeding compared to no treatment. Our findings support the use of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with PVT.

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.

Dabigatran Reversal With Idarucizumab in 2 Patients With Portal Vein Thrombosis Undergoing Orthotopic Liver Transplantation

There are limited data to guide the use of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients prior to liver transplantation especially when using direct oral anticoagulants. In this article, we present 2 cases. The first is a 42-year-old male with cirrhosis complicated by portal vein thrombosis (PVT) treated with dabigatran who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation without complication. The second case is a 65-year-old man with alcoholic cirrhosis complicated by PVT treated with dabigatran who underwent orthotopic liver transplantation and required reoperation for surgical bleeding. Both patients were treated with dabigatran's reversal agent idarucizumab prior to incision. In this case series, we discuss the treatment of cirrhotic patients with various anticoagulants, considerations for anticoagulant selection and reversal prior to liver transplant, and questions for future investigation.

Current knowledge and management of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is an increasingly recognised complication of cirrhosis whose incidence increases in parallel with the severity of cirrhosis. Several risk factors have been associated with the occurrence and progression of PVT. Although the negative effect of complete PVT on the surgical outcome of liver transplant recipients is clear, its impact on cirrhosis progression remains uncertain. Treatment options include anticoagulants and interventional thrombolytic therapies, which are chosen almost on a case-by-case basis depending on the characteristics of the patient and the thrombus. In this manuscript, we review current knowledge regarding the epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis and classification, natural history, clinical consequences and treatment of non-neoplastic PVT in cirrhosis.

Anticoagulant therapy for splanchnic vein thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Treatment of splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is challenging, and evidence to guide therapeutic decisions remains scarce. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy for SVT. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov were searched from inception through December 2019, without language restrictions, to include observational studies and randomized controlled trials reporting radiological or clinical outcomes in patients with SVT. Pooled proportions and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in a random-effects model. Of 4312 records identified by the search, 97 studies including 7969 patients were analyzed. In patients receiving anticoagulation, the rates of SVT recanalization, SVT progression, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, and overall mortality were 58% (95% CI, 51-64), 5% (95% CI, 3-7), 11% (95% CI, 8-15), 9% (95% CI, 7-12), and 11% (95% CI, 9-14), respectively. The corresponding values in patients without anticoagulation were 22% (95% CI, 15-31), 15% (95% CI, 8-27), 14% (95% CI, 9-21), 16% (95% CI, 13-20), and 25% (95% CI, 20-31). Compared with no treatment, anticoagulant therapy obtained higher recanalization (RR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.66-3.44) and lower thrombosis progression (RR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.13-0.42), major bleeding (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58-0.92), and overall mortality (RR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.60). These results demonstrate that anticoagulant therapy improves SVT recanalization and reduces the risk of thrombosis progression without increasing major bleeding. The incidence of recurrent VTE remained substantial in patients receiving anticoagulation, as well. Effects were consistent across the different subgroups of patients. This trial was registered on the PROPERO database at (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero//display_record.php?ID=CRD42019127870) as #CRD42019127870.

Efficacy and Safety of Nadroparin Calcium-Warfarin Sequential Anticoagulation in Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhotic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Anticoagulation therapy in portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis is still a matter of debate. Therefore, the aim of this work was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nadroparin calcium-warfarin sequential (NWS) anticoagulation therapy in cirrhotic patients and to find an optimal anticoagulation strategy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of trans-jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) was previously a contraindication for trans-jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current available studies investigating outcomes of TIPS for cirrhotic patient with PVT.

METHODS

Multiple databases were systematically searched to identify studies investigating the outcomes of TIPS for cirrhotic patients with PVT. The quality of studies was assessed by Cochrane Collaboration method and Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies. The demographic data, outcomes, combined treatment, and anticoagulation strategy were extracted.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were identified with 460 patients enrolled in the analysis. The technical success rate was 98.9% in patients without portal vein cavernous transformation and 92.3% in patients with portal vein cavernous transformation. One-year portal vein recanalization rate was 77.7%, and TIPS patency rate was 84.2%. The cumulative encephalopathy rate was 16.4%. One-year overall survival was 87.4%.

CONCLUSION

TIPS is indicated for portal hypertension related complications and the restoration of pre-transplantation portal vein patency in cirrhotic patients with PVT. Cavernous transformation is an indicator for technical failure. Post-TIPS anticoagulation seems not mandatory. Simultaneous TIPS and percutaneous mechanical thrombectomy device could achieve accelerated portal vein recanalization and decreased thrombolysis-associated complications, but further investigation is still needed.

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.

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.

Comparison of Non-Tumoral Portal Vein Thrombosis Management in Cirrhotic Patients: TIPS Versus Anticoagulation Versus No Treatment

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus in optimal management of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis. The purpose of this study is to compare the safety and thrombosis burden change for cirrhotic patients with non-tumoral PVT managed by transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) only, anticoagulation only, or no treatment.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study evaluated 52 patients with cirrhosis and non-tumoral PVT managed by TIPS only (14), anticoagulation only (11), or no treatment (27). The demographic, clinical, and imaging data for patients were collected. The portomesenteric thrombosis burden and liver function tests at early follow-up (6-9 months) and late follow-up (9-16 months) were compared to the baseline. Adverse events including bleeding and encephalopathy were recorded.

RESULTS

The overall portomesenteric thrombosis burden improved in eight (72%) TIPS patients, three (27%) anticoagulated patients, and two (10%) untreated patients at early follow-up (p = 0.001) and in seven (78%) TIPS patients, two (29%) anticoagulated patients, and three (17%) untreated patients in late follow-up (p = 0.007). No bleeding complications attributable to anticoagulation were observed.

CONCLUSION

TIPS decreased portomesenteric thrombus burden compared to anticoagulation or no treatment for cirrhotic patients with PVT. Both TIPS and anticoagulation were safe therapies.

Safety and Efficacy of Anticoagulation in Patients with Cirrhosis: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Portal vein thrombosis is a serious adverse event that occurs during liver cirrhosis. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant therapy and prophylactic anticoagulant therapy in cirrhosis patients with (/without) portal vein thrombosis.

METHODS

Eligible comparative studies were identified by searching the following electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CNKI. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals using fixed-effects models. Recanalization and thrombus progression were defined as the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included adverse events and death mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 3479 patients were included in this analysis. Compared with the control group, the recanalization rate in the anticoagulant therapy group was increased (P < 0.00001) in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis without increasing adverse events. Multiple use of enoxaparin in small doses is safer than single large doses (P=0.004). Direct oral anticoagulants are more effective (P < 0.00001) and safer than traditional anticoagulants. Prophylactic anticoagulant therapy can effectively prevent portal vein thrombosis formation (P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulation therapy can treat or prevent portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis and is a relatively safe treatment.

Efficacy and safety of anticoagulants in liver cirrhosis patients with portal vein thrombosis: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants in liver cirrhosis patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

METHODS

PubMed, BioMed Central, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were retrieved to identify relevant literature. Forest plots were applied to display the results of the meta-analysis. The odds ratios (ORs) were used as the effect index for the enumeration data, and the effect size was expressed as 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots and Egger's test.

RESULTS

Eight articles included 225 patients with liver cirrhosis and PVT receiving anticoagulants and 232 not receiving anticoagulants. The data demonstrated that the recanalization rate of PVT was significantly higher in patients with anticoagulant treatment than in patients without anticoagulant treatment (OR=5.60; 95% CI: 3.40-9.22; P<0.001). The exacerbation risk of PVT was significantly lower in patients with anticoagulant treatment than in patients without anticoagulant treatment (OR=0.15; 95% CI: 0.04-0.54; P<0.001). A significantly lower portal hypertension bleeding effect was observed in patients with anticoagulant treatment than in patients without anticoagulant treatment (OR=0.21; 95% CI: 0.10-0.45; P<0.001). Low molecular weight heparins (LMWH) were more effective in preventing the PVT exacerbation in liver cirrhosis patients with PVT than warfarin (OR=0.16; 95% CI: 0.08-0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulants were effective and safe in treating patients with liver cirrhosis and PVT as they could increase the PVT recanalization rate and decrease the risks of PVT exacerbation and portal hypertension bleeding.

Anticoagulant Treatment for Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

 Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a common complication in patients with liver cirrhosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy for SVT in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

 In this systematic review and meta-analysis, studies reporting on SVT recanalization and progression, recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE), major bleeding, and overall mortality were searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov up to December 2019. Pooled proportions and risk ratios (RRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

 A total of 1,475 patients were included in 26 studies (23 observational and 3 randomized controlled trials). In patients receiving anticoagulant therapy, SVT recanalization occurred in 68% (95% CI, 62-74; 571/842 patients; 22 studies), SVT progression in 6% (95% CI, 4-9; 25/748 patients; 22 studies), recurrent VTE in 10% (95% CI, 4-22; 48/399 patients; 7 studies), major bleeding in 6% (95% CI, 4-10; 58/785 patients; 18 studies), and overall mortality in 9% (95% CI, 6-14; 68/787 patients; 17 studies). Anticoagulant treatment was associated with higher SVT recanalization (RR 3.19; 95% CI, 1.42-7.17), lower thrombosis progression (RR 0.28; 95% CI, 0.15-0.52), major bleeding (RR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28-0.97), and overall mortality (RR 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24-0.73) compared with no treatment.

CONCLUSION

 Anticoagulant therapy seems to improve vein recanalization and to reduce SVT progression, major bleeding, and overall mortality in cirrhotic patients with SVT. The incidence of recurrent VTE during anticoagulation remains substantial.