Treatment response and bleeding events associated with anticoagulant therapy of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Anticoagulation in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: Friend or Foe?

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

Rivaroxaban combined with repeat hepatectomy for treatment of cirrhosis-related acute portal vein thrombosis with hepatocellular carcinoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Acute portal vein thrombosis (PVT) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a severe complication of liver cirrhosis and its prognosis is affected by clinical decision to a large extent, while the order of management, the approaches of treatment, and the adjustment of the plan are all the key and difficult points.

CASE SUMMARY

This case was treated with low molecular weight heparin (4000 U/12 h) for 14 d, followed by rivaroxaban (10 mg/12 h) and then partial hepatectomy twice, of which the first was performed 1 mo after anticoagulation, and the second was performed 4 mo later, by which the primary lesion and postoperative new lesion were resected, respectively. Rivaroxaban was taken constantly except the perioperative period, while gingival bleeding occurred after 8 mo of anticoagulation, so suspension of rivaroxaban was carried out for 1 wk, after which the bleeding was relieved, and a half dose of rivaroxaban (10 mg/d) was used to continue anticoagulation from then on. The thrombus remained recanalized and there was no tumor recurrence during the following 2 years.

CONCLUSION

When there are indications for anticoagulation and partial hepatectomy in patients with cirrhosis-related acute PVT with HCC, anticoagulation followed by surgery is recommended, as anticoagulation may reduce thrombosis in a short time, which could not only decrease the risk of surgery, but also have little influence on the opportunity of tumor treatment. And when recurrence of HCC occurs, if possible, repeat hepatectomy should be considered to improve the prognosis. Anticoagulant strategy should be adjusted accordingly if rivaroxaban causes bleeding, and it should be stopped or reduced after the bleeding is stable.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Advances in diagnosis and treatment of portal venous thrombosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is one of the common complications of liver cirrhosis, which can further increase portal vein pressure and aggravate liver function decompensation. However, due to the insidious onset and atypical symptoms, the importance of PVT has been neglected in clinical work for quite a long time. With the development of clinical diagnostic technology, the detection rate of PVT has increased year by year. At present, the well-established treatment methods for PVT include anticoagulant therapy, interventional therapy, and surgical treatment. However, the optimal choice for PVT treatment remains unclear. In this paper, we briefly review the recent progress in the diagnosis and treatment of PVT in order to provide a theoretical reference for the refined clinical management of patients with PVT.

2020 Clinical Update in Liver Transplantation

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