Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonist for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Challenges to Laboratory Monitoring of Direct Oral Anticoagulants

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) exert anticoagulation effect by directly inhibiting Factor Xa (rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban) or thrombin (dabigatran). Though DOACs are characterized by fixed-dose prescribing and generally do not require routine laboratory drug-level monitoring (DLM), circumstances may arise where the DLM may aid in clinical decision-making, including DOAC dose adjustment, anticoagulant class change, or decisions to withhold or administer reversal agents. We review the current literature that describes high-risk patient groups in which DLM may be beneficial for improved patient anticoagulation management and stewardship. The review also summarizes the limitations of conventional coagulation testing and discuss the emerging utility of quantitative methods for routine and rapid emergent evaluation of DOAC drug levels-in particular, the Anti-Xa activity to detect Factor Xa Inhibitors (rivaroxaban, apixaban, and edoxaban). Both technical and regulatory barriers to widespread DLM implementation are limiting factors to further clinical research that must be overcome, in order to propose universal DOAC DLM strategies and provide clinical-laboratory correlation to formally classify high-risk patient groups.

Direct oral anticoagulants to treat deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in patients with cirrhosis: are we there yet?

A 59-year-old female with Child-Pugh class B cirrhosis attributed to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis complicated by hepatic encephalopathy, portal hypertension with esophageal varices, and thrombocytopenia is seen for management of an acute segmental right lower lobe pulmonary embolism in a clinic. She is hemodynamically stable. Complete blood count is notable for hemoglobin 11.6  g/dL and platelets 80 K/μL. Prothrombin time is 12.6 seconds; partial thromboplastin time, 33.7 seconds; and fibrinogen, 221  mg/dL. She was referred to discuss if a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) can be used for anticoagulation. What would you suggest?

How to manage splanchnic vein thrombosis in patients with liver disease

Liver cirrhosis and splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) are strictly correlated. Portal vein thrombosis, the most common location of SVT, is frequently diagnosed in liver cirrhosis (pooled incidence 4.6 per 100 patient-years), and liver cirrhosis is a common risk factor for SVT (reported in 24%-28% of SVT patients). In cirrhosis-associated SVT, anticoagulant treatment reduces mortality rates, thrombosis extension, and major bleeding, and increases the rates of recanalization, compared to no treatment. Achieving vessel recanalization improves the prognosis of cirrhotic patients by reducing liver-related complications (such as variceal bleeding, ascites, hepatic encephalopathy). Anticoagulation should be therefore routinely prescribed to cirrhotic patients with acute SVT unless contraindicated by active bleeding associated with hemodynamic impairment or by excessively high bleeding risk. Of note, early treatment is associated with higher probability of achieving vessel recanalization. The standard treatment consists of low-molecular-weight heparin, followed by oral anticoagulants (eg, vitamin K antagonists or direct oral anticoagulants), if not contraindicated by severe liver dysfunction. Cirrhotic patients with SVT should be treated long-term (especially if candidate for liver transplantation) since liver cirrhosis is a persistent risk factor for recurrent thrombosis. In this review, we discuss the management of SVT in patients with liver cirrhosis, with a focus on the anticoagulant treatment in terms of indications, timing, drugs, duration, and particular scenarios, such as gastroesophageal varices and thrombocytopenia.

Risk of Bleeding in Liver Cirrhosis Receiving Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

 Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are effective for the management of thromboembolic disorders. However, bleeding remains a major concern in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs.

METHODS

 PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The incidence of bleeding episodes in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs was pooled. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to compare the incidence of bleeding episodes in cirrhotic patients who received DOACs versus those who received conventional anticoagulants and did not receive anticoagulants.

RESULTS

 Twenty-nine studies were included. All bleeding, major bleeding, fatal bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage episodes were observed in 310/2,469, 100/1,388, 2/611, 166/1,886, and 5/1,147 cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs, respectively. Their pooled incidences were 13, 6, 0, 8, and 0%, respectively. They became higher in subgroup analyses of studies with advanced age, a longer treatment duration, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C. Compared with conventional anticoagulants, DOACs were associated with lower incidences of all bleeding (OR = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.52-0.98) and major bleeding (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.37-0.83) in cirrhotic patients, but not those of fatal bleeding (OR = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.04-1.28), gastrointestinal bleeding (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.52-1.17), or intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.12-1.12). The incidences of all bleeding (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.22-4.79) and major bleeding (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.26-3.61) did not significantly differ between cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) who received DOACs and those who did not receive anticoagulants.

CONCLUSION

 DOACs carry a low risk of bleeding in liver cirrhosis. Age, treatment duration, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh class may be associated with bleeding in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs. The risk of bleeding is not increased by DOACs in cirrhotic patients with PVT.

Use of direct oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism treatment at extremes of body weight, renal and liver function: an illustrated review

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been a welcome addition to clinical practice due to the practical advantages they confer over traditional anticoagulants. In many countries, DOACs are now used as first-line treatment for the management of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Traditional anticoagulants allow for a degree of individualization, either through monitoring the international normalized ratio in the case of vitamin-K antagonists or through dose titration according to bodyweight in the case of low-molecular-weight heparin. However, the use of fixed doses and removal of the need for routine monitoring has created uncertainty in prescribing DOACs for patients at the extremes of bodyweight, renal function, and patients with liver impairment, who were not well represented in the DOAC licensing clinical trials. The discipline of pharmacokinetics is concerned with the movement of drugs through the body. Although the extremes of bodyweight and renal and liver function will influence the pharmacokinetics of DOACs, are these changes significant enough to affect clinical outcomes of bleeding and thrombosis? In other words, can the fixed-dosing strategy of DOACs accommodate these differences in physiology? In this review, we recap key pharmacokinetic principles for drug dosing; review venous thromboembolism trial and real-world data on patients prescribed DOACs at the extremes of bodyweight, renal function, and liver function; relate this to the pharmacokinetic properties of DOACs; and summarize the state of the field and current unknowns.

Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of splanchnic vein thrombosis: A state of art

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a manifestation of venous thromboembolism in an unusual site. Portal, mesenteric, and splenic veins are the most common vessels involved in SVT which occurs mainly in patients with liver cirrhosis, although non-cirrhotic patients could be affected as well. Thrombosis of hepatic veins, also known as Budd-Chiari syndrome, is another manifestation of SVT. Prompt diagnosis and intervention are mandatory in order to increase the recalization rate and reduce the risk of thrombus progression and hypertensive complications. Traditional anticoagulation with heparin and vitamin-K antagonists is the treatment of choice in these cases. However, recent studies have shown promising results on the efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this setting. Available results are mainly based on retrospective studies with small sample size, but first clinical trials have been published in the last years. This manuscript aims to provide an updated overview of the current evidence regarding the role of DOACs for SVT in both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic patients.

[Use of specific antidotes in DOAC-associated severe gastrointestinal bleeding - an expert consensus - Antagonozation of direct oral anticoagulants in gastrointestinal hemorrhages]

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is one of the most common complications associated with the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). Clear algorithms exist for the emergency measures in (suspected) GI bleeding, including assessing the medication history regarding anti-platelet drugs and anticoagulants as well as simple coagulation tests during pre-endoscopic management. Platelet transfusions, fresh frozen plasma (FFP), or prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) are commonly used for optimizing the coagulation status. For severe bleeding under the thrombin inhibitor dabigatran, idarucizumab is available, and for bleeding under the factor Xa inhibitors rivaroxaban or apixaban, andexanet alfa is available as specific antidotes for DOAC antagonization. These antidotes represent emergency drugs that are typically used only after performing guideline-compliant multimodal measures including emergency endoscopy. Antagonization of oral anticoagulants should be considered for severe gastrointestinal bleeding in the following situations: (1) refractory hemorrhagic shock, (2) endoscopically unstoppable bleeding, or (3) nonavoidable delays until emergency endoscopy for life-threatening bleeding. After successful (endoscopic) hemostasis, anticoagulation (DOACs, vitamin K antagonist, heparin) should be resumed timely (i.e. usually within a week), taking into account individual bleeding and thromboembolic risk.

Global research on portal vein thrombosis and liver transplantation: A bibliometric and visualized study

In recent years, the association between portal vein thrombosis and liver transplantation has extensive attention from physicians worldwide. However, there is no available literature on bibliometric analysis in this research area. Herein, we aimed to conduct a bibliometric analysis to identify the hotspots and frontiers of research related to portal vein thrombosis and liver transplantation. Documents published between 2002 and 2022 were retrieved and downloaded from the Web of Science Core Collection database. VOSviewer was utilized to generate a visualization network map of authors, nations, institutions, journals, and keyword co-occurrence/clustering. Additionaly, CiteSpace was used to analyze the keywords with the strongest bursts. A total of 1272 articles and reviews were extracted from the database. The author Marco Senzolo published the largest number of papers. The United States was the most prolific country, and Hope-Bochon (France) was the top productive institution. Liver Transplantation was the most prolific journal in the field. The most commonly identified keywords in the study were cirrhosis, risk factors, portal vein thrombosis, and management, as revealed by the keyword co-occurrence analysis. It is suggested that patients with cirrhosis, portal vein thrombosis prevention, and management measures for portal vein thrombosis have been prominet topics in recent years. Furthermore, an analysis of keywords with the strongest citation bursts highlighted pediatric liver transplantation, direct oral anticoagulants, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease as current research trends. Research in portal vein thrombosis and liver transplantation exhibits a general upward trend. The latest hot topics within this area of study involve pediatric patients and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

Bleeding and Thrombotic Complications in Patients With Cirrhosis: A State-of-the-Art Appraisal

Much has evolved over the past 25 years regarding our understanding of the coagulopathy of liver disease. Paradoxically, this form of coagulopathy is relatively hypercoagulability despite the common clinical impression of a hemorrhagic tendency. The latter is largely driven by portal-mesenteric venous pressure (ie, portal hypertension) and has little to do with hemostatic pathways. It cannot be emphasized enough that the INR does not offer a meaningful measure in this situation and may lead to interventions such as fresh frozen plasma that can actually worsen portal pressure and hence pressure-driven bleeding. With regard to procedure-related bleeding, we point out substantial differences in the definition of high-risk procedures and propose a new operational definition dependent on the applicability of local hemostatic measures, although this requires further investigation. The common occurrence of venous thrombosis in these patients requires careful consideration of hemostatic pathways and overall risk and benefit of intervention. The decision regarding anticoagulation therapy needs to be driven not only by a global assessment including history of non-portal hypertensive-related bleeding, but also by fall risk which can result in head trauma in patients prone to encephalopathy. This is probably best estimated by frailty but has yet to be adequately investigated. In the background of these concerns, several superimposed and complex conditions including infections and renal dysfunction should be taken into account. Inherited forms of thrombophilia in the setting of cirrhosis perhaps do not outweigh the thrombophilia inherent to liver disease but warrant further consideration.

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.

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.

Evaluation of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin for Treatment of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis Patients

Background and Objectives: Even though low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), including dalteparin, has a critical role in portal vein thrombosis (PVT) treatment in liver cirrhosis (LC) patients, the predictive factors and the proper dose of dalteparin for PVT treatment and relapse have not yet been investigated. Materials and Methods: This retrospective study evaluated the records of LC patients receiving dalteparin from July 2013 to June 2019. The odds ratio (OR) and adjusted OR were calculated from univariate and multivariable analyses, respectively. Results: Among data from 121 patients, the overall recanalization rate of all patients was 66.1% (80 patients). No history of variceal bleeding (OR 4.6, 95% CI: 1.88-11.43) and the case of newly developed thrombus before dalteparin treatment (OR 3.2, 95% CI: 1.24-8.08) were predictive factors associated with increased treatment response. Relapse of PVT occurred in 32 out of 80 patients (40%) who showed a recanalization. The risk of relapse was 3.1-3.9 times higher in those who took more than three months or more than six months from the diagnosis of PVT to dalteparin treatment compared to those who took less than these durations, respectively. In the dosing regimen, patients with the kg-based dosing regimen showed 2.6 times better response than those with the fixed dosing regimen. However, no difference in bleeding complications was observed. Conclusion: In the dosing regimen, the kg-based regimen that was the same as the venous thromboembolism regimen was a better option for the efficacy and safety of dalteparin therapy. Additionally, when treating PVT in LC patients, careful monitoring is recommended for patients with predictive factors for treatment response and relapse of PVT.

Epidemiology of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) may be associated with negative outcomes in patients with liver cirrhosis. However, the prevalence and incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis are heterogeneous among studies and have not been sufficiently determined yet.

METHODS

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Eligible studies would explore the prevalence and/or incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis without hepatocellular carcinoma or abdominal surgery. Pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using a random-effect model. Factors associated with the presence/occurrence of PVT were also extracted.

RESULTS

Among the 8549 papers initially identified, 74 were included. Fifty-four studies explored the prevalence of PVT in liver cirrhosis with a pooled prevalence of 13.92% (95%CI=11.18-16.91%). Based on cross-sectional data, Child-Pugh class B/C, higher D-dimer, ascites, and use of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) were associated with the presence of PVT in liver cirrhosis. Twenty-three studies explored the incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis with a pooled incidence of 10.42% (95%CI=8.16-12.92%). Based on cohort data, Child-Pugh class B/C, higher model of end-stage liver disease score, higher D-dimer, lower platelets count, decreased portal flow velocity, ascites, use of NSBBs, and moderate or high-risk esophageal varices could predict the occurrence of PVT in liver cirrhosis.

CONCLUSION

Approximately one seventh of cirrhotic patients have PVT, and one tenth will develop PVT. Progression of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension seems to be in parallel with the risk of PVT. Prospective studies with detailed information about classification and extension of PVT in liver cirrhosis are needed.

The Efficacy and Safety of Anticoagulants in the Treatment of Cirrhotic Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy in patients with cirrhotic PVT, and compare differences in efficacy and safety among different anticoagulants.

Methods

We comprehensively searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to April 2022 for studies using anticoagulants for cirrhotic PVT. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

3 RCTs and 14 cohort studies involving 1270 patients were included. Anticoagulant therapy can increase the recanalization rate compared with non-anticoagulation therapy (OR 4.44, 95% CI 3.11-6.32, I² = 2.5%) and can decrease the extension rate of cirrhotic PVT (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.62, I² = 41.0%), without increasing the incidence of total bleeding (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.75-1.97, I² = 9.8%), major bleeding (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.49-1.95, I² = 19.7%), and variceal bleeding (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12-1.01, I² = 39.9%). Subgroup analysis showed that VKA, LMWH, and DOACs could increase the recanalization rate of PVT and were not associated with the risk of bleeding. Studies that compared direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with warfarin directly showed that the recanalization rate of PVT in the DOACs group might be higher than that in the warfarin group (OR 30.99, 95% CI 7.39-129.87, I² = 0.0%), and there was no difference in the rate of total bleeding (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.01-8.65, I² = 79.6%).

Conclusions

Anticoagulants are safe and effective in patients with cirrhotic PVT. The rate of PVT recanalization associated with DOACs may be higher than warfarin.