Risk Factors for Portal Vein Thrombosis in Patients With Cirrhosis Awaiting Liver Transplantation in Shiraz, Iran

Clinical characteristics and predictors of benign portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis: A retrospective single-center study

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common thrombotic complication of cirrhosis. It can lead to variceal bleeding and bowel ischemia and also complicate liver transplantation. Identifying the possible risk factors associated with PVT can aid in identifying patients at high risk, enabling their screening and potentially preventing PVT through the rational use of anticoagulants. This study focuses on examining the clinical characteristics of PVT in cirrhotic patients and identifying the clinical and biochemical factors that are linked to the development of PVT. Consecutive hospitalized cirrhotic patients between 2015 and 2023 were identified through the hospital's computerized medical records based on the Tenth Revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-10) coding system and retrospectively analyzed. 928 individuals were included in this study; 783 (84.3%) without PVT and 145 (15.7%) with benign PVT. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) was significantly more common in the PVT group (P-value = .02), while alcohol and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) were less common in this group (P-value = .01 and .02, respectively). Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) (P-value < .01), ascites (P-value = .01), and spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) (P-value = .02) were more common in the PVT group. Patients with PVT had a higher international normalized ratio (INR) level (P-value = .042) and lower plasma albumin (P-value = .01). No differences were identified in white blood cell, hemoglobin, platelet, and bilirubin levels. However, patients with PVT had higher model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) (P-value = .01) and Child-Pugh scores (P-value = .03). This study demonstrated a higher likelihood of PVT presence in cirrhotic patients with advanced age, HBV, and HCC, along with ascites, SBP, splenomegaly, hypoalbuminemia, elevated INR, and a higher MELD score. Nevertheless, additional research endeavors are necessary to accurately ascertain and validate supplementary risk factors within a broader demographic.

Effect of factor VIII and FVIII/PC ratio on portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta‑analysis

BACKGROUND

To date, there is an ongoing debate regarding the ability to predict PVT development using markers of FVIII or FVIII/PC ratio. This study presents evidence-based medical findings on the influence of FVIII activity levels and FVIII/PC values in the formation of PVT in cirrhosis.

METHODS

The search for original studies on risk factors for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) associated with cirrhosis was conducted, which primarily focused on comparing circulating FVIII activity levels or FVIII/PC ratio in cirrhotic patients with and without PVT. The quality of evidence from each study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included a total of 10 original studies. In total, 2250 cirrhotic patients were included, with 414 having PVT and 1836 without PVT. The pooled analysis using a random-effects model showed no significant difference in standardized mean difference (SMD) for FVIII activity levels in cirrhotic patients with or without PVT (SMD = 0.12, 95% CI=-0.46 to 0.70, P = 0.68), but there was significant heterogeneity (I2 = 95.52%, P = 0.00). Meta-regression analysis indicated that differences in mean FVIII activity levels in the PVT group, the number of cases in the non-PVT group, and the study design methods partially contributed to the heterogeneity (P < 0.05). However, compared to the non-PVT group, the PVT group had higher FVIII/PC ratio with a statistically significant difference (SMD = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.63, P = 0.00), and there was no significant heterogeneity (I2 = 28.62%).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the FVIII/PC ratio not only reflects the severity of liver disease, but also can be used as one of the predictors of PVT development.

Risk Factors of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Patients with Different Child-Pugh Classes Liver Cirrhosis

Aim: to evaluate the frequency of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and build predictive models of the development of PVT for patients with liver cirrhosis (LC) of A and B/C classes by Child-Pugh.

Materials and methods. Research design is a case-control. The Case group included 130 patients with newly diagnosed PVT not caused by invasive hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); 29 patients were assigned to class A, 101 patients were assigned to class B/C. From the database of cirrhotic patients without PVT 60 Controls for class A and 205 for B/C were selected using sratified randomization by sex, age and etiology of cirrhosis. The Mann-Whitney U-test and Pearson's chi-squared test were used to compare the groups. Odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) were calculated. Logistic regression models are constructed with the separation of the sample into training and test (0.7; 0.3). The operational characteristics of the models were calculated on the test sample; ROC analysis was carried out, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was calculated.

Results. The overall frequency of PVT was 4.1 % (95 % CI 2.7-5.8 %) in class A and 10.4 % (95 % CI 8.5-12.5 %) class B/C. Patients with class A and B/C PVT differed from the corresponding controls by more severe portal hypertension: the frequency of bleeding / number of interventions on varices compared with the control were 41/45 % vs. 7/8 % (p < 0.001) for class A and 25.7/30.7 % vs. 16.1/16.1 % (p < 0.05) for class B/C, ascites frequency was 24 % vs. 8 % (p < 0.05) for class A and 89.1 % vs. 68.3 % (p < 0.001) for class B/C. The cutoff by the portal vein diameter was the same for both classes — 13.4 mm; the spleen length was similar and amounted 17.5 mm for class A, 17.1 mm for class B/C. Patients with PVT differed from the corresponding controls by neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio: class A 2.33 (1.82; 3.61) vs. 1.76 (1.37; 2.20), p < 0.01, class B/C 2.49 (1.93; 3.34) vs. 2.15 (1.49; 3.26), p < 0.05. Patients of class B/C had a higher incidence of newly diagnosed malignant tumors - 23.8% (primarily HCC that does not invade the portal vein), compared with control and cases of class A - 6.3 % and 3 % (p < 0.05), respectively. The best model for class A included variceal bleeding, ascites, portal vein diameter, absolute number of neutrophils, for class B — ascites, spleen length, portal vein diameter, malignant tumors / local factors; sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and AUC were 79.3 %, 90 %, 86.5 %, 0.897 and 73.3 %, 68.3 %, 69.9 %, 0.789, respectively.

Conclusion. Independently of the Child-Pugh class of LC, the main risk factor for PVT is severe portal hypertension.

Usefulness of Imaging and Biological Tools for the Characterization of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

This study aims to evaluate the performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) and biological tests to characterize portal vein thrombosis (PVT). We retrospectively analyzed 101 patients with PVT, liver cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In all patients, demographic, biologic, imaging, and endoscopic data were collected. All patients underwent CEUS and a second line imaging technique (CE-CT/MRI) to characterize PVT. Of the 101 cirrhotic subjects, 77 (76.2%) had HCC. CEUS had 98.6% sensitivity (Se) and 89.3% specificity (Sp) for the characterization of PVT type. A significant correlation was found between alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels and the PVT characterization at CEUS (r = 0.28, p = 0.0098) and CT/MRI (r = 0.3, p = 0.0057). Using the AFP rule-out cutoff values for HCC (AFP < 20 ng/dL), 78% of the subjects were correctly classified as having benign PVT, while 100% of the subjects were correctly classified as tumor-in-vein (TIV) when the rule-in cutoff value was used (AFP ≥ 200 ng/dL). Using multiple regression analysis, we obtained a score for classifying PVT. The PVT score performed better than CEUS (AUC—0.99 vs. AUC—0.93, p = 0.025) or AFP serum levels (AUC—0.99 vs. AUC—0.96, p = 0.047) for characterizing PVT. In conclusion, CEUS is a sensitive method for the characterization of PVT. The PVT score had the highest performance for PVT characterization.

Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

Patients with cirrhosis of the liver are at high risk of developing portal vein thrombosis (PVT), which has a complex, multifactorial cause. The condition may present with a myriad of symptoms and can occasionally cause severe complications. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of PVT. There are uncertainties regarding the effect on PVT and its treatment outcome in patients with cirrhosis. The main challenge for managing PVT in cirrhosis is analyzing the risk of hemorrhage compared to the risk of thrombus extension leading to complications. All current knowledge regarding non-tumor PVT in cirrhosis, including epidemiology, risk factors, classification, clinical presentation, diagnosis, impact on natural history, and treatment, is discussed in the present article.

Outcome of Liver Transplant Patients With Intraoperative-Detected Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Shiraz, Iran

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine outcomes and predictors of intraoperative-detected portal vein thrombosis in liver transplant recipients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 806 adult liver transplant recipients from Shiraz, Iran, to determine those with intraoperative-detected portal vein thrombosis. Patients with this complication were compared with age- and sex-matched patients without this complication. Background diseases, surgery parameters, hospital admission, reoperation, rethrombosis, acute rejection, and use of antico-agulants were assessed. Cox proportional hazards, logistic regression, and random classification forest and random survival forest plots were used for data analyses.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 44.7 ± 13.2 years. Patients with intraoperative-detected portal vein thrombosis (n = 91; 11.3%) had mortality ratio of 2.9 (range, 1.0-8.6) and 2-year survival of 78% versus 2-year survival rate of 92% in patients without this disease. Median time of survival in patients with this complication who died was 2 weeks versus 10 months in patients who died and did not have this complication. Random classification forest plots showed that high fasting blood sugar, autoimmune hepatitis, low prothrombin time, and cryptogenic cirrhosis were (in order) the main predictors of this complication. Random survival forest plots revealed that low prothrombin time, having intraoperative-detected portal vein thrombosis, Model for End Stage Liver Disease score, primary sclerosing cholangitis, diabetes mellitus, and hepatocellular carcinoma were (in order) the main predictors of death in liver transplant recipients. Low body mass index was associated with mortality in patients with intraoperative-detected portal vein thrombosis (by Cox proportional hazards).

CONCLUSIONS

One of every 9 liver transplant patients had intraoperative-detected portal vein thrombosis. Hazard of death was 2.9, and death occurred far earlier in patients with this complication. Improvements in diabetes mellitus care, prothrombin time, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, and body mass index may improve outcomes of these patients.

THE PREDICTORS OF MORTALITY IN NON-TRAUMATIC SPLENECTOMIES

BACKGROUND

There are quite a few studies examining prognostic factors in non-traumatic splenectomies compared to traumatic ones.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the predictors of mortality in patients who underwent splenectomy for non-traumatic spleen diseases.

METHODS

Medical records of the patients, who had undergone total splenectomy for non-traumatic spleen diseases at a tertiary center between January 2009 and December 2019, were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria included patients younger than 18 years of age, partial splenectomies, splenectomies applied to facilitate surgery for malignancy on contiguous organs, and splenectomies performed during liver transplantation. Iatrogenic splenic injuries were regarded as trauma and these cases were also excluded.

RESULTS

The current study included 98 patients. Nine (9.2%) patients died. In univariate analysis, age, the presence of hematological neoplasia, hematocrit, hemoglobin, white blood cell counts, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, indications for splenectomy, application of emergency surgery, surgical technique, and transfusion of blood components were all significantly associated with mortality. In multivariate analysis, the presence of hematological malignancy [P=0.072; OR=7.17; (CI: 0.386-61.56)], the application of emergency surgery [P=0.035; OR=8.33; (CI: 1.165-59.595)] and leukocytosis [P=0.057; OR=1.136; (CI: 0.996-1.296)] were found to be positively associated with mortality.

CONCLUSION

Hematologic neoplasia, emergency surgery, and leukocytosis were the independent predictors of mortality in patients, who were operated on for non-traumatic spleen diseases. A thorough preoperative evaluation, early therapeutic intervention, and advanced surgical techniques are important and can serve to minimize complications and mortality in case of inevitable splenectomy. Immunological research can provide new therapeutic opportunities that may impact positively on patients by minimizing morbidity and mortality.

Association of portal venous system thrombosis with endoscopic variceal treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The association of endoscopic variceal treatment (EVT) with the development of portal venous system thrombosis (PVST) in liver cirrhosis remains uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the incidence of PVST after EVT and to explore the association of EVT with the development of PVST in liver cirrhosis. All relevant studies were searched via the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. The incidence of PVST in patients treated with and without EVT was pooled. Risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Heterogeneity among studies was calculated. Meta-regression, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses were used to analyze the source of heterogeneity. Thirteen studies involving a total of 833 patients were included. The pooled incidence of PVST after EVT was 10.4% (95% CI, 4.9-17.7%). There was a statistically significant heterogeneity (I2 = 83.3%, P < 0.0001). Meta-regression, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses did not find the source of heterogeneity. Four studies compared the incidence of PVST between patients treated with and without EVT. The incidence of PVST was significantly higher in the EVT group than that in the no-EVT group (risk ratio: 2.23; 95% CI, 1.11-4.49; P = 0.02). The heterogeneity was not statistically significant (I2 = 0%, P = 0.43). In conclusion, PVST after EVT may not be scare, and EVT may increase the risk of PVST in liver cirrhosis.

No Association of Homocysteine, Anticardiolipin Antibody, and Anti-β2 Glycoprotein I Antibody With Portal Venous System Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis

Portal venous system thrombosis (PVST), a common complication of liver cirrhosis, is closely associated with thrombophilia. To explore the association of homocysteine (Hcy), anticardiolipin antibody (aCL), and anti-β2 glycoprotein I antibody (aβ2GPI), which are possible thrombophilic factors, with PVST in liver cirrhosis. Overall, 654 non-malignant patients (219 with and 435 without liver cirrhosis) admitted between January 2016 and June 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Presence of PVST, degree of main portal vein (MPV) thrombosis, and clinically significant PVST were identified. Hcy level, hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy), aCL positivity, and aβ2GPI positivity were compared according to the presence of liver cirrhosis and PVST. Positive aβ2GPI was significantly more frequent in patients with liver cirrhosis than those without, but Hcy level and proportions of HHcy and positive aCL were not significantly different between them. PVST could be evaluated in 136 cirrhotic patients. Hcy level [10.57 μmol/L (2.71-56.82) versus 9.97 μmol/L (2.05-53.44); P = 0.796] and proportions of HHcy [4/44 (9.1%) versus 13/81 (16.0%); P = 0.413] and positive aCL [1/23 (4.3%) versus 10/52 (19.2%); P = 0.185] and aβ2GPI [9/23 (39.1%) versus 21/52 (40.4%); P = 0.919] were not significantly different between cirrhotic patients with and without PVST. There was still no significant association of Hcy level, HHcy, aCL, or aβ2GPI with PVST based on Child-Pugh classification, MPV thrombosis >50%, and clinically significant PVST. Hcy, aCL, and aβ2GPI may not be associated with PVST in liver cirrhosis, suggesting that routine screening for Hcy, aCL, and aβ2GPI should be unnecessary in such patients.

Protein S for Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhotic Patients Waiting for Liver Transplantation

Portal vein thrombus (PVT) is a challenge in liver transplantation. How PVT develops in cirrhotic patients who already have coagulopathy is unclear. This study aimed to investigate possible contributing factors to PVT in cirrhotic patients. A total of 349 cirrhotic patients who waited liver transplantation were included in this study and 48 of them had PVT. For all the patients, the mean age was 53.5 ± 9.0 year old, and 75.9% of the patients were male. There were 233 (66.8%) patients who had either hepatitis B or C. The mean Model For End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score was 16.4 ± 7.5. Eighteen of 48 patients with PVT and 145 of 301 patients without PVT received liver transplantation. Multivariate analysis showed that low protein S level (hazard ratio = 2.46, p = 0.017) was the only independent risk factor for PVT development. Protein S deficiency also demonstrated prognostic value on short-term survival, not only for cirrhotic patients awaiting liver transplantation (69.9% versus 84.1% at 1 year survival, p = 0.012), but also for the patients having liver transplantation (70.4% versus 84.8% at 1 year survival, p = 0.047). In conclusion, protein S level was an independent risk factor for PVT development in decompensated cirrhotic patients, and protein S deficiency was also a prognostic factor for the patients waiting for liver transplantation.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: Why a well-known complication is still matter of debate

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) represents a well-known complication during the natural course of liver cirrhosis (LC), ranging from asymptomatic cases to life-threating conditions related to portal hypertension and hepatic decompensation. Portal flow stasis, complex acquired hypercoagulable disorders and exogenous factors leading to endothelial dysfunction have emerged as key factors for PVT development. However, PVT occurrence remains unpredictable and many issues regarding its natural history, prognostic significance and treatment are still elusive. In particular although spontaneous resolution or disease stability occur in most cases of PVT, factors predisposing to disease progression or recurrence after spontaneous recanalization are not clarified as yet. Moreover, PVT impact on LC outcome is still debated, as PVT may represent itself a consequence of liver fibrosis and hepatic dysfunction progression. Anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are considered safe and effective in this setting and are recommended in selected cases, even if the safer therapeutic option and the optimal therapy duration are still unknown. Nevertheless, their impact on mortality rates should be addressed more extensively. In this review we present the most debated questions regarding PVT, whose answers should come from prospective cohort studies and large sample-size randomized trials.

Risk factors associated with portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: A case-control study

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with liver cirrhosis is a common complication associated with adverse outcomes. Aim. To build a predictive model for PVT in cirrhotic patients. Materials and methods. A single centre case-control study was carried out. From the database of 1512 cirrhotic patients 94 with newly diagnosed PVT based on contrast-enhanced computed tomography were referred to the Case group. Malignant PVT was an exclusion criterion. Patients without PVT were stratified and matched according to sex, age and etiology of cirrhosis; case-control ratio was 1 : 3-4. The prevalence of PVT in the database, clinical, laboratory, instrumental parameters of the groups were evaluated. Logistic regression model was used to estimate association between variables and PVT. Results and discussion. The overall prevalence of PVT was 6.2% with the highest rates among the patients with HBV infection - 16.7%, nonalcoholic steatohepatitis - 15.6%, alcohol abuse in combination with HCV infection - 11.7%. The best predictive model included variables: Child-Pugh classes B-C (coefficient of regression β=1.853, р=0.001), ascites (β=0.460, р=0.003), hepatocellular carcinoma without vascular invasion (β=2.126, р=0.0001), endoscopic band ligation (β=0.774, р=0.003), azygoportal disconnection (β=2.734, р=0.001), portal hypertensive gastropathy (β=0.793, р=0.017), portal vein diameter (β=0.203, р=0.004), and local factors - ulcerative colitis flare, Clostridium difficile enterocolitis, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, colorectal cancer, splenectomy, cholecystectomy (β=2.075, р=0.017). The model had accuracy 85.8% (95% CI 81.7-89.4%), sensitivity - 55.1% (95% CI 43.4-66.4%), specificity - 95% (95% CI 91.6-97.3%), and AUC - 0.871 (95% CI 0.826-0.916). Conclusion. Child-Pugh classes B-C, severe portal hypertension, hepatocellular carcinoma without vascular invasion, and local factors were estimated as risk factors of PVT in cirrhotic patients.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: diagnosis, natural history, and therapeutic challenges

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent complication in cirrhosis and its prevalence increases with disease severity. Several factors are involved in the development and progression of PVT. The challenge for the management of PVT is the precise evaluation of the bleeding risk as opposed to life-threatening extension of thrombosis. Nevertheless, the impact on the progression and outcome of liver disease is unclear. A critical evaluation of the available data discloses that treating PVT in cirrhotics is safe and effective. However, there are open issues, such as which anticoagulant could represent a safer therapeutic option, and when and for how long this treatment should be administered to cirrhotic patients with PVT.

The Long-Term Outcomes for Patients with Budd-Chiari Syndrome Caused by Behcet's Disease: A Case Series on the Results, from Cirrhosis to Death

BACKGROUND

Budd-Chiari syndrome, which is a rare complication of Behcet's disease, carries a high mortality rate.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to present our long-term follow up experience with patients suffering from Budd-Chiari syndrome due to Behcet's disease.

METHODS

The records of 402 patients with Behcet's disease were evaluated retrospectively. To facilitate detection of the long-term complications caused by Budd-Chiari syndrome, the patients were evaluated via physical examinations, laboratory tests, imaging modalities, and endoscopy results.

RESULTS

The data for 402 patients diagnosed with Behcet's disease, who were followed up at our hospital over 16 years, were analyzed retrospectively. Five of these 402 patients (1.2%) were diagnosed as having Budd-Chiari syndrome. The patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome were aged between 23 and 54, and all five were male. The interval between the onset of Behcet's disease and the development of Budd-Chiari syndrome ranged from 1 to 8 years. All the patients had combined venous occlusion (affecting the hepatic vein and inferior vena cava). Portal venous thrombosis was detected in only one patient (Case 1), who died 1 month after the diagnosis of Budd-Chiari syndrome. The survival time for the other four patients after the diagnosis of Budd-Chiari syndrome ranged from 4 to 16 years. During the long-term follow-up, hepatic masses were detected via radiological surveillance in Case 3 (in the form of large regenerative nodules) and Case 4 (nodular regenerative hyperplasia and cirrhosis).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, portal venous thrombosis was detected in the patient who died during the acute period only. A study including large numbers of Budd-Chiari-syndrome patients with Behcet's disease and portal venous thrombosis would be helpful to determine the prognostic significance of portal venous thrombosis in Budd-Chiari-syndrome patients with Behcet's disease. In addition, patients should be monitored regularly for the development of hepatic masses via a long-term surveillance program.