Splanchnic vein thrombosis in candidates for liver transplantation: usefulness of screening and anticoagulation

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.

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.

Narrative review of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management from an interventional radiology perspective

OBJECTIVE

This paper examines the incidence, clinical presentation, and pathophysiology of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhosis. Additionally, we have reviewed the literature regarding the current status of medical and interventional radiology management of PVT and have proposed a novel algorithm for the management given different clinical scenarios. Lastly two representative cases displaying endovascular treatment options are provided.

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombus in the setting of cirrhosis is an increasingly recognized clinical issue with debate on its pathophysiology, natural course, and optimal treatment. Approximately one-third of patients are asymptomatic, and detection of the thrombus is an incidental finding on imaging performed for other reasons. In 30% to 50% of patients, PVT resolves spontaneously. However, there is increased post-transplant mortality in patients with completely occlusive PVT, therefore effective early revascularization strategies are needed for patients with complete PVT who are expected to undergo liver transplant. Additionally, no consensus has been reached regarding PVT treatment in terms of timing and type of interventions as well as type and duration of anticoagulation.

METHODS

Computerized literature search as well as discussion with experts in the field.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of PVT is complex, as many variables affect which treatments can be used. Anticoagulation appears to be the optimal first-line treatment in patients with acute PVT but without bleeding varices or mesenteric ischemia. Minimally invasive treatments include various methods of mechanical thrombectomy, chemical thrombolysis, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement with or without variceal embolization. Definitive recommendations are difficult due to lack of high quality data and continued research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of different anticoagulants as well as the timing and use of various minimally invasive therapies in specific circumstances.

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.

Systemic inflammation as a risk factor for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: a prospective longitudinal study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Various risk factors for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) development in patients with cirrhosis have been identified, but the role of systemic inflammatory reaction is unknown. The study aims to assess the association between markers of systemic inflammation and PVT in cirrhosis.

METHODS

Between January 2014 and October 2015, 107 outpatients with cirrhosis and no PVT were recruited, and followed till February 2017. White blood cell count, serum concentrations of high-sensitive C-reactive protein, ferritin, tumor necrosis factor-alpha and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were evaluated at baseline and every 3 or 6 months till PVT diagnosis or end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Median age, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and follow-up period of the studied population was 55 years (IQR 46-62 years), 9.6 points (IQR 7.5-12 points) and 19 months (12-24 months), respectively. PVT developed in 10.3% of the patients. Lymphocyte count below 1.2 ´ 109/L [hazard ratio, 6.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.29-28.2; P = 0.022], IL-6 above 5.5 pg/mL (hazard ratio, 5.64; 95% CI, 1.21-26.33; P  = 0.028) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.04; P = 0.028) were associated with a higher risk of PVT development. IL-6 and lymphopenia remained associated with subsequent PVT development after adjustment for nonselective beta-blockers, spleen size, portosystemic collaterals, oesophageal varices (grade ≥2) and ascites, but also with alcohol as the cause for cirrhosis and MELD ≥13.

CONCLUSION

In patients with cirrhosis, markers of systemic inflammation IL-6 and lymphopenia are predictive of PVT independently of markers of portal hypertension. These results draw our attention on a factor so far overlooked in the pathogenesis of PVT.

Predicting portal thrombosis in cirrhosis: A prospective study of clinical, ultrasonographic and hemostatic factors

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a relatively frequent event in patients with cirrhosis. While different risk factors for PVT have been reported, such as decreased portal blood flow velocity (PBFV) and parameters related with severity of portal hypertension, these are based on retrospective studies assessing only a discrete number of parameters. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the incidence and risks factors for non-tumoral PVT development in a large prospective cohort of patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed an exhaustive evaluation of clinical, biochemical, inflammatory and acquired/hereditary hemostatic profiles in 369 patients with cirrhosis without PVT who were prospectively followed-up. Doppler ultrasound was performed at baseline and every 6 months or whenever clinically indicated. PVT development was always confirmed by computed tomography.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients developed non-tumoral PVT, with an incidence of 1.6%, 6% and 8.4% at 1, 3 and 5 years, respectively. Low platelet count, PBFV <15 cm/sec and history of variceal bleeding were factors independently associated with a high PVT risk. No relationship between PVT development and any other clinical biochemical, inflammatory and acquired or hereditary hemostatic parameter was found.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cirrhosis, the factors predictive of PVT development were mainly those related to the severity of portal hypertension. Our results do not support the role of hemostatic alterations (inherited or acquired) and inflammatory markers in the prediction of PVT in patients with cirrhosis.

LAY SUMMARY

Patients with cirrhosis and more severe portal hypertension are at higher risk of non-tumoral portal vein thrombosis development. Acquired or inherited hemostatic disorders, as well as inflammatory status, do not seem to predict the development of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis.

Therapeutic anticoagulation after liver transplantation is not useful among patients with pre-transplant Yerdel-grade I/II portal vein thrombosis: A two-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer a contraindication for liver transplantation (LT). While therapeutic anticoagulation (tAC) is recommended during the waiting period, there is no evidence for its usefulness in the prevention of PVT recurrence after LT.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of tAC post-LT in the prevention of PVT recurrence.

PATIENTS/METHODS

All adult LTs performed in two high-volume centers between 2003 and 2018 were retrospectively analysed. Only patients with PVT classified as Yerdel grade I or II and with standard portal reconstruction were included. PVT recurrence and tAC-associated morbidity within 1 year were compared between patients receiving tAC or not.

RESULTS

During the study period, of 2612 LTs performed, 235 (9%) patients with PVT were included; 113 patients (48.1%) received post-LT tAC (tAC group) while 122 (51.9%) did not (non-tAC group). The incidence of bleeding events was significantly higher in the tAC group (26 [23%] vs. 5 [4.1%], P < .01) and the initial hospitalization duration was longer (21 vs. 17.5 days, P < .01). Within the first year, PVT recurrence was observed for 9 (3.8%) patients without any difference between the tAC and non-tAC groups (6 [5.1%] vs. 3 [2.5%], P = .39). The only identified risk factor for PVT recurrence was the recipients' age (odds ratio= 0.94, P = .03). Graft (P = .11) and patient (P = .44) survival were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic anticoagulation is not necessary in the prevention of grade I/II PVT recurrence and is associated with higher morbidity and longer hospital stay.

Non-malignant portal vein thrombosis in a cohort of cirrhotic patients: Incidence and risk factors

AIM

Non-malignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a complication of liver cirrhosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the annual incidence of PVT and related risk factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed clinical, laboratory, and radiological data collected prospectively from September 2016 to September 2017. A follow-up of 36 months was performed in a subset of patients to determine the cumulative incidence of PVT and related complications.

RESULTS

The study included 567 patients. The incidence of PVT at 12, 24, and 36 months was 3.7%, 0.8%, and 1.4%, respectively. Patients with PVT were compared with patients without PVT, and showed differences in albumin (p = 0.04), aspartate aminotransferase (p = 0.04), hemoglobin (p = 0.01), and prothrombin activity (p = 0.01). The presence of hydropic decompensation (57.1% vs. 30.1%; p 0.004), gastroesophageal varices (76.2% vs. 39.5%; p = 0.05), variceal bleeding (52.4% vs. 22.7%; p < 0.001), hepatic encephalopathy (38.1% vs. 9.9%; p = 0.01), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (9.5% vs. 1.7%; p < 0.001), and use of beta-blockers (71.4% vs. 27.7%; p < 0.001) were significantly associated. In the multivariate analysis, use of beta-blockers and hepatic encephalopathy appeared as risk factors, and high albumin levels a protective factor.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of PVT was 3.7%. Beta-blockers and hepatic encephalopathy were risks factors. High albumin levels were a protective factor.

Evolution of Nonmalignant Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Cirrhosis: A Pictorial Review

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication in liver cirrhosis, especially in advanced cirrhosis. It may be related to a higher risk of liver-related events and liver function deterioration. Imaging examinations can not only provide an accurate diagnosis of PVT, such as the extent of thrombus involvement and the degree of lumen occupied, but also identify the nature of thrombus (i.e., benign/malignant and acute/chronic). Evolution of PVT, mainly including development, recanalization, progression, stability, and recurrence, could also be assessed based on the imaging examinations. This article briefly reviews the pathophysiology, diagnosis, classification, and evolution of PVT with an emphasis on their computed tomography imaging features.

Comparison of Fondaparinux and Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin in the Treatment of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis is the most common thrombotic complication in cirrhosis. About 60% of anticoagulated patients can achieve recanalization. Despite fondaparinux (FPX) theoretical advantages, data are lacking about safety and efficacy for treatment of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.

METHODS

Cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis treated with FPX or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) were retrospectively included. The extension of thrombosis at baseline and its evolution during anticoagulant treatment were evaluated. Patients were treated with LMWH or FPX at therapeutic dosage and reduction was considered in selected cases.

RESULTS

There were 124 patients included. Main portal vein branch, splenic, and superior mesenteric veins were involved in 84%, 13%, and 36% of cases, respectively. Forty-one patients (33%) were treated with FPX and 83 (67%) with LMWH. The probability of resolution of thrombosis at 36 months was significantly higher in patients treated with FPX than in those treated with LMWH (77% vs 51%; P = .001), particularly when prescribed at reduced dose. With multivariate analysis, the treatment with FPX (hazard ratio 2.38; P = .002) and use of a full dose (hazard ratio 1.78; P = .035) were independent predictors of portal vein full recanalization. Bleeding rate was higher in patients treated with FPX than in those treated with LMWH (27% vs 13%; P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

FPX appears to be more effective than LMWH in the treatment of portal vein thrombosis when used at reduced dose, also in complete thrombosis. FPX should be considered among possible treatments for portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.

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.

Usage of Direct Acting Oral Anticoagulants in Cirrhotic and Non-Cirrhotic Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Systematic Review

Thrombosis of the portal vein (PVT) is generally seen in the setting of liver cirrhosis and to a lesser extent in the absence of cirrhosis. There is no clear guidance in relation to approaching treatment with anticoagulation in this condition. The professional societies and guidelines recommend treatment with traditional anticoagulation like low-molecular-weight heparin and vitamin-K antagonists in patients presenting with acute portal vein thrombosis. There is no clarity in relation to treatment in the setting of chronic PVT and in patients with cirrhosis. Also, the role of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) that are becoming a preferred choice for anticoagulation for various other indications is not clear in the case of PVT. There are a very few studies in the medical literature that have investigated the role of DOACs in patients with PVT in different settings. Thus, we performed a systematic review of the literature to study the use of DOACs in PVT in patients with and without cirrhosis. The results of the available studies show that DOACS appears to be a promising choice for the treatment of patients with PVT. The availability of more data in the future along with better availability of the approved reversal agents for various DOACs is expected to make DOACS a preferred choice for the clinicians to treat patients with PVT.

Nomogram Model for Prediction of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis After Splenectomy: A Retrospective Analysis of 2 Independent Cohorts

Background

The aim of this study was to establish and validate an easy-to-use nomogram to predict portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis after splenectomy and to test its predictive ability.

Material/Methods

This retrospective study included 315 patients with cirrhosis who underwent splenectomy at 2 high-volume medical centers. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression method was used to select the predictors in the training cohort, and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to establish the predictive nomogram model. We determined the prediction value of the nomogram by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), the calibration curve, and decision curve analysis. Finally, the applicability of the nomogram was internally and independently validated.

Results

The predictors of PVT included portal vein diameter, splenic vein diameter, body mass index, and platelet count. Based on the clinical and radiomic models, the nomogram had good predictive efficiency for predicting PVT in patients with cirrhosis after splenectomy, with an AUROC of 0.887 (0.856 in internal validation and 0.796 in independent validation). The decision curve analysis revealed that the nomogram had good clinical application value.

Conclusions

We successfully developed an easy-to-use nomogram to predict the probability of PVT in patients with cirrhosis after splenectomy. The nomogram can help clinicians make timely, individualized clinical decisions for PVT in patients with cirrhosis after splenectomy.

Systematic Review of Thrombolysis Therapy in the Management of Non-Cirrhosis-Related Portal Vein Thrombosis

PURPOSE

To review available evidence to assess the efficacy and safety of thrombolysis therapy for non-cirrhosis-related portal vein thrombosis (PVT) that has not improved with anti-coagulation.

METHODS

A literature search of databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PUBMED, Cochrane and World Wide Web identified studies after 2000 utilizing portal vein thrombolysis in non-cirrhotic patients, with a minimum of 5 patients. Nine studies met criteria with 134 patients. The primary outcome evaluated was radiological re-canalization of the portal vein and symptomatic improvement post treatment. Secondary data points obtained included morbidity, mortality, thrombolysis approach and technique.

RESULTS

The re-canalization rate following thrombolysis was 84% (0.67-1.02 CI 95%) and the symptomatic improvement rate 86% (0.70-1.01 CI 95%). The major complication rate was 7% (0.01-0.14 CI 95%) and the overall complication rate 25% (0.08-0.41 CI 95%). The direct and systemic thrombolysis approach showed no significant re-canalization rates with an odds ratio of 0.78 (0.24-2.55 CI 95%, P = 0.68). Thrombectomy in conjunction with thrombolysis demonstrated no improved patency or symptom relief with an odds ratio of 1 (0.17-6.03 CI 95%, P = 1.00).

CONCLUSION

Thrombolysis is an effective and safe therapy for portal vein thrombosis in non-cirrhotic patients where systemic anti-coagulation has failed. The heterogenicity of study thrombolysis protocols limits the evaluation of secondary outcomes, and future data should be standardized to determine the role of the thrombolysis access route and thrombectomy.

Targeting von Willebrand factor in liver diseases: A novel therapeutic strategy?

Acute and chronic liver disease are associated with substantial alterations in the hemostatic system. Evidence from both experimental and clinical studies suggests that anticoagulants slow the progression of liver disease. Efficacy of those anticoagulant drugs is, in part, attributed to a reduction of microthrombi formation within the liver. Although anticoagulant drugs show promising results, bleeding risk associated with these drugs is an obvious drawback, particularly in patients with a complex coagulopathy driven by decreased liver function. Identifying therapies that reduce intrahepatic thrombosis with minimal bleeding risk would significantly advance the field. Among the hemostatic alterations observed in patients are substantially increased levels of the platelet-adhesive protein von Willebrand factor (VWF). In contrast, levels of A Disintegrin and Metalloproteinase with Thrombospondin motifs, the enzyme that regulates VWF activity, are significantly reduced in patients with liver disease. Highly elevated VWF levels are proposed to accelerate intrahepatic thrombus formation and thus be a driver of disease progression. Strong clinical evidence suggesting a link between liver disease and changes in VWF is now being matched by emerging mechanistic data showing a detrimental role for VWF in the progression of liver disease. This review focuses on clinical and experimental evidence supporting a connection between VWF function and the progression of acute and chronic liver diseases. Furthermore, with the recent anticipated approval of several novel therapies targeting VWF, we discuss potential strategies and benefits of targeting VWF as an innovative therapy for patients with liver disease.

Impact of Portal Vein Thrombosis on Endoscopic Variceal Band Ligation in Liver Cirrhosis

Background. Portal vein (PV) thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of liver cirrhosis and can refer to thrombosis within the PV that can extend to its left or right branches and in some cases to the superior mesenteric vein or the splenic vein (Chawla and Bodh, 2015). For severe PVT patients, there are possibilities of increasing PV resistance and reduction of the blood flow though PV towards liver, which exacerbate liver function damage meanwhile elevating the gastrointestinal variceal bleeding risk. Endoscopic Variceal band ligation (EVL) is often used to prevent esophageal variceal bleeding; postoperative complications such as severe gastrointestinal bleeding and bleeding-related death, fever, retrosternal pain, and esophageal stenosis may appear. There was absence of the research which evaluated the impact of PVT in liver cirrhosis on the complication of endoscopic Variceal band ligation for now. We herein aimed to compare cirrhosis patients with and without PVT of recent complications after EVL. Method. We established the retrospective investigation on 144 consecutive cirrhosis patients (excluding patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and who received portal vein-systemic circulation devascularization or shunt surgery, splenectomy, hepatectomy, liver transplantation, transjugular intrahepatic portal vein stent shunt (TIPS), endoscopic varices Variceal ligation, or sclerotherapy before) who have received first endoscopic esophageal varices band ligation in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, ZheJiang University, between January 2014 and December 2017. Portal vein Doppler ultrasonography, liver computerized tomography (CT), and angiography or liver-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were applied to evaluate the portal vein thrombosis of each patient before EVL. There were 18 patients confirmed with portal vein thrombosis while the other 126 patients without PVT. The primary end point for this research is the upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage and related death occurred from the date of ligation until leaving hospital, and the secondary end point is the appearance of postoperative fever and retrosternal pain. Results. There are no significant differences of gastrointestinal bleeding, bleeding-related death, fever, or retrosternal pain after EVL and the length of hospital stays between cirrhotic patients with or without PVT ( $P=0.34,0.51,0.58,0.61,0.88$ ). Conclusion. Liver cirrhosis with portal vein thrombosis did not increase incidence of recent complications of the endoscopic Variceal band ligation.

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.

Treatment of portal vein thrombosis: an updated narrative review

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is the most frequent among the splanchnic vein thrombosis, accounting for 90% of cases. More than half of PVT are provoked by liver cirrhosis, solid cancer or myeloproliferative neoplasms. The remaining cases are non-malignant non-cirrhotic PVT and include either unprovoked events or thrombosis secondary to other less common risk factors (e.g. abdominal surgery, intrabdominal inflammations/infections, or hormonal stimuli). Anticoagulant therapy in patients with acute symptomatic PVT should be started early after diagnosis, if no active bleeding, to obtain greater vessel recanalization and reduce the occurrence of portal-hypertension related complications. Gastroesophageal varices do not represent a contraindication to anticoagulant treatment, as long as adequate measures have been undertaken for the prophylaxis of gastroesophageal bleeding. Different treatment options (unfractionated or low molecular weight heparin, vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants [DOACs]) can be considered. In this narrative review we will discuss the treatment of PVT in the three most common scenarios (cirrhosis-associated, cancer-associated and non-malignant non-cirrhotic PVT). We will also discuss the role of the DOACs and summarise recent guidelines on this topic.

Portal vein thrombosis: an overview of current treatment options

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a splanchnic vascular disorder characterised by a recent or chronic thrombotic occlusion of the portal venous system. Its aetiology is miscellaneous, and its management is demanding since PVT can play a critical role as far as morbidity and mortality are concerned. Indeed, PVT can develop as a complication of portal hypertension (PH), in association or not with advanced chronic liver disease, and aggravate its clinical consequences such as variceal bleeding and ascites. Furthermore, a diagnosis of PVT in a non-cirrhotic context can potentially reveal a previously unknown hypercoagulable condition, requiring further diagnostic steps and specific treatment in addition to anticoagulation. In addition to established therapeutic approaches, new strategies, including newer pharmacological treatments and interdisciplinary invasive procedures, gain more attention and have been increasingly introduced into clinical practice. This review aims at discussing the current knowledge in terms of treatment options for PVT.

Consensus for management of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis (2020, Shanghai)

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common and severe complication of liver cirrhosis. So far, there have been few consensuses or practice guidelines on the management of PVT in liver cirrhosis. In this expert consensus, we systematically review the epidemiology, risk factors, imaging examinations, diagnosis, assessment of disease severity, and treatment strategy of PVT in liver cirrhosis, based on the most recent evidence and expert opinions, to further standardize the diagnosis and treatment of the disease in clinical practice.

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.

Clinical application of liver stiffness measurement in patients with cavernous transformation of portal vein

The clinical outcomes differ between patients with cavernous transformation of the portal vein (CTPV) with and without cirrhosis. Therefore, invasive liver biopsy may be needed for the differential diagnosis of patients with CTPV with or without cirrhosis. The present study aimed to investigate the diagnostic efficacy of liver stiffness measurements (LSM) for the prediction of cirrhosis in patients with CTPV. A total of 20 patients with CTPV, 34 with chronic hepatitis B (CHB)-related cirrhosis and 20 healthy volunteers, were retrospectively recruited in the study. CTPV was diagnosed with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and ultrasound for the abdomen. LSM values were detected for each patient, while liver biopsy was performed in each patient in the CTPV and cirrhosis groups. The results demonstrated that LSM values were significantly lower in the CTPV group (12.5 kPa; range, 6.8-21.5 kPa) compared with the CHB-related cirrhosis group (21.0 kPa; range, 15.5-27.2 kPa; P=0.017). However, this was still higher compared with healthy volunteers (4.9 kPa; range 4.0-5.8 kPa; P<0.001). In addition, CTPV patients with cirrhosis (17.7 kPa; range, 13.9-30.8 kPa) exhibited significantly increased LSM values compared with those without cirrhosis (6.4 kPa; range, 5.7-7.8 kPa; P<0.001). Furthermore, LSM values in CTPV patients without cirrhosis were slightly higher compared with those of healthy volunteers (P=0.003), while no statistically significant difference was observed in LSM between CTPV patients with cirrhosis and CHB-related cirrhosis group. These findings indicated that LSM values could be used for the differential diagnosis of CTPV patients with or without cirrhosis. However, further validation studies are needed.

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.

Management of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

While portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequently encountered complication in the cirrhosis population, its management can be challenging for even the most experienced clinicians. Multiple factors must be considered with regards to management, including the degree of underlying portal hypertension and liver dysfunction, risks of therapies including anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement, and extent of the thrombosis. Interpreting the available literature to determine the best treatment strategy for any individual patient can be especially challenging given the lack of prospective, randomized controlled trials and the heterogeneity of cohorts studied. This review will provide an overview of PVT in the cirrhosis population, including necessary steps in evaluation and the potential benefits and drawbacks of different treatment approaches.

Anticoagulation Favors Thrombus Recanalization and Survival in Patients With Liver Cirrhosis and Portal Vein Thrombosis: Results of a Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Benefit and risk of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) remain controversial, especially in those with asymptomatic PVT and in non-liver transplant candidates. Furthermore, the predictors of portal vein recanalization and bleeding events after anticoagulation are critical for making clinical decisions, but still unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of anticoagulation for PVT in liver cirrhosis and explore the predictors of portal vein recanalization and bleeding events after anticoagulation.

METHODS

All studies regarding anticoagulation for PVT in liver cirrhosis were searched via PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Thrombotic outcomes, bleeding events, and survival were compared between anticoagulation and non-anticoagulation groups. Predictors of portal vein recanalization and bleeding events were pooled. Risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies including 1696 cirrhotic patients with PVT were included. Anticoagulation significantly increased portal vein recanalization (RR = 2.61; 95% CI 1.99-3.43; P < 0.00001) and overall survival (RR = 1.11; 95% CI 1.03-1.21; P = 0.01) and decreased thrombus progression (RR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.14-0.49; P < 0.0001). Anticoagulation did not significantly influence overall bleeding (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.47-1.30; P = 0.34). Early initiation of anticoagulation (RR = 1.58; 95% CI 1.21-2.07; P = 0.0007) significantly increased portal vein recanalization. Child-Pugh class B and C (RR = 0.77; 95% CI 0.62-0.95; P = 0.02) and higher MELD score (MD = - 1.48; 95% CI - 2.20-0.76; P < 0.0001) were significantly associated with decreased portal vein recanalization. No predictor significantly associated with bleeding events was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Early initiation of anticoagulation should be supported in liver cirrhosis with PVT. Predictors of portal vein recanalization should be taken into consideration to identify those who may not benefit from anticoagulation.

REGISTRATION

The work was registered in PROSPERO with registration no. CRD42020157142.

Nontumoral Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Challenging Consequence of Liver Cirrhosis

Nontumoral portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is an increasingly recognized complication in patients with cirrhosis. Substantial evidence shows that portal flow stasis, complex thrombophilic disorders, and exogenous factors leading to endothelial dysfunction have emerged as key factors in the pathogenesis of PVT. The contribution of PVT to hepatic decompensation and mortality in cirrhosis is debatable; however, the presence of an advanced PVT increases operative complexity and decreases survival after transplantation. The therapeutic decision for PVT is often determined by the duration and extent of thrombosis, the presence of symptoms, and liver transplant eligibility. Evidence from several cohorts has demonstrated that anticoagulation treatment with vitamin K antagonist or low molecular weight heparin can achieve recanalization of the portal vein, which is associated with a reduction in portal hypertension-related events and improved survival in cirrhotic patients with PVT. Consequently, interest in direct oral anticoagulants for PVT is increasing, but clinical data in cirrhosis are limited. Although the most feared consequence of anticoagulation is bleeding, most studies indicate that anticoagulation therapy for PVT in cirrhosis appears relatively safe. Interestingly, the data showed that transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt represents an effective adjunctive therapy for PVT in cirrhotic patients with symptomatic portal hypertension if anticoagulation is ineffective. Insufficient evidence regarding the optimal timing, modality, and duration of therapy makes nontumoral PVT a challenging consequence of cirrhosis. In this review, we summarize the current literature and provide a potential algorithm for the management of PVT in patients with cirrhosis.

Folate levels in hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) occurs frequently in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and is often diagnosed in the course of a routine patient evaluation and surveillance for liver cancer. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between folate status and portal vein thrombosis.

METHODS

HCC with PVT patients were 78, HCC without PVT were 60 and control subjects were 70 randomly selected. We evaluate serum and red blood cellular folate, homocysteine, alpha fetal protein cholesterol, triglycerides, prothrombin time.

RESULTS

HCC patients with PVT showed lower levels of serum folate, respect HCC patients without PVT, with an average difference of 1.6 nmol/l p < 0.01 (95% CI - 2.54 to - 0.66), red cell folate 33.6 nmol/l p < 0.001 (95% CI - 43.64 to - 23.55) and albumin 0.29 g/dl p < 0.001 (95% CI - 0.42 to - 0.15); PVT patients displayed higher levels of bilirubin 0.53 mg/dl p < 0.001 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.78), INR 0.91 p < 0.001 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.09), γGT 7.9 IU/l (95% CI 4.14 to 11.65) and homocysteine 4.6 μmol/l p < 0.05 (95% CI 0.32 to 8.87) CONCLUSION: The low folate concentration and higher levels of homocysteine are associated with the loss of antithrombotic function, and with a more aggressive course of HCC and with a higher change of complications related to portal vein thrombosis.

Up to 50% of portal vein thrombosis remains undiagnosed until liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Impact of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) on the clinical course in liver transplant candidates remains unclear. This study aims to identify prevalence and risk factors for PVT, assess outcome after liver transplantation (LT) in patients with PVT and study the effect of anticoagulation.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study was performed from January 2006 until June 2016. Patients were stratified according to presence of PVT. Risk factors and outcome were assessed using logistic regression and survival analysis.

RESULTS

Among 390 adults who underwent orthotopic LT, PVT occurred in 40 (10.3%). In, respectively, 10 (25%), 7 (17.5%), and 23 (57.5%) patients, PVT was identified at time of evaluation for transplantation, on the waiting list and during transplantation. A beneficial trend was present favoring the use of anticoagulation for PVT resolution (n = 3/7 vs 0/9; p = .062). Patient and graft survival were similar between the groups after a median follow-up of 5 years. However, 1-year patient survival was significantly lower (p = .031) in patients with PVT.

CONCLUSION

Portal vein thrombosis occurred in 10% of patients awaiting LT was undiagnosed in 50% until moment of LT and had a deleterious effect on 1-year survival. Anticoagulation showed a beneficial trend on recanalization of PVT and survival rate.

Efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in non-malignant portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of anticoagulation in treating non-malignant portal vein (PV) thrombosis (PVT) in patients with liver cirrhosis remains unclear. In our meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation for the treatment of non-malignant PVT in these patients.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the effects of anticoagulation on non-malignant PVT in patients with liver cirrhosis. We assessed the rates of PV recanalization, variceal bleeding, and any bleeding.

RESULTS

We included 9 observational studies which involved 474 patients. The rate of PV recanalization was significantly higher in patients who received anticoagulation compared to those who did not: 65.2% vs. 25.2%; relative risk (RR) 2.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.80-2.96; P<0.00001. Variceal bleeding was significantly lower in patients who received anticoagulation: 0.1% vs. 18.5%; RR 0.15, 95%CI 0.04-0.55; P=0.004. Any bleeding was similar between patients who received anticoagulation and those who did not: 10.3% vs. 22.7%; RR 0.43, 95%CI 0.09-1.99; P=0.28.

CONCLUSIONS

Anticoagulation use increased the rate of PV recanalization in cirrhotic patients with non-malignant PVT. Anticoagulation decreased the rate of variceal bleeding and did not increase the rate of any bleeding.

Prognostic Factors for Acute Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Occlusion Using Expanded Polytetrafluoroethylene-Covered Stent

BACKGROUND

The expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE)-covered stent has been widely used in the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure. However, the epidemiologic data of acute TIPS occlusion (ATO) and the underlying mechanisms are scarce.

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and prognostic factors for ATO within 1 week in TIPS recipients using ePTFE-covered stents.

METHODS

We identified 222 patients who underwent ePTFE-covered TIPS creation for complications of portal hypertension between June 2015 and June 2017 at a large tertiary center. Medical records and TIPS procedure data were retrospectively reviewed, and the influence of these variables on ATO was assessed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

TIPS technical success was achieved in 219 patients (98.6%). Two patients were excluded due to missing data, leaving 217 patients for final analysis. ATO occurred in nine patients (4.1%). Blood flow was restored by balloon angioplasty (n = 4), additional stent insertion (n = 4), and parallel TIPS (n = 1). In multivariable logistic regression, intrastent stenosis (HR 43.871; 95% CI 3.816, 504.373; P = 0.002), previous splenectomy (HR 26.843; 95% CI 2.106, 342.124; P = 0.011), and stent shortening in the hepatic vein (HR 11.54; 95% CI 1.021, 130.416; P = 0.048) were demonstrated as independent significant risk factors for ATO.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the intrastent stenosis, previous splenectomy, and stent shortening in the hepatic vein are vital prognostic factors for ATO in TIPS recipients. Individualized post-TIPS management strategy was required.

Efficacy and safety study of direct-acting oral anticoagulants for the treatment of chronic portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis

AIMS

This study is designed to investigate the efficacy and safety of direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the treatment of chronic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in liver cirrhosis patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, patients were divided into DOACs group (oral rivaroxaban tablets or dabigatran etexilate capsules) and control group (no anticoagulant treatment). Based on propensity score matching method, 40 patients with cirrhosis and chronic PVT in each of the groups were recruited for this study. CT portal venography was used to monitor the portal vein area. Color Doppler ultrasound was used to monitor the portal vein flow rate. Biochemical testing and thromboelastography (TEG) were also used for monitoring the status of PVT.

RESULTS

After 3 months of DOACs treatment, the complete/partial recanalization rate of DOACs was 12.8% (5/39). After 6 months of DOACs treatment, the PVT complete/partial recanalization rate of DOACs was 28.2% (11/39). The recanalization rate and portal vein flow velocity improvement were higher than those in the control group (P < 0.05). Patients' total bilirubin level and Child-Pugh scores were improved in the DOACs group. The TEG coagulation index was lower in the DOACs group than in the control group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the DOACs group and control group in the cases of bleeding (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

DOACs are effective and safe for chronic PVT in patients with liver cirrhosis. The TEG can predict the risk of bleeding in patients with chronic PVT in cirrhosis, which is more sensitive than conventional coagulation function test.

Portal vein thrombosis prevalence and mortality among alcoholic cirrhosis in a nationwide inpatient cohort

OBJECTIVES

Portal vein thrombosis is commonly associated with cirrhosis. The effect of alcoholic cirrhosis on portal vein thrombosis prevalence and mortality has not been well studied.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing the 2000-2014 National Inpatient Sample Database. We included patients older than 18 years with decompensated cirrhosis without a history of liver transplantation or hepatocellular carcinoma. We further identified patients with alcoholic cirrhosis vs. non-alcoholic cirrhosis. Primary outcomes included the risk and mortality of portal vein thrombosis in alcoholic cirrhosis. Secondary outcomes included trends of portal vein thrombosis prevalence and mortality in alcoholic cirrhosis, implications of portal vein thrombosis on complications in alcoholic cirrhosis vs. non-alcoholic cirrhosis, and risk of venous thromboembolism in alcoholic cirrhosis.

RESULTS

Among 1 892 271 patients with decompensated alcoholic cirrhosis, portal vein thrombosis prevalence was 1.3%. Alcoholic cirrhosis was associated with lower risk of portal vein thrombosis (odds ratio 0.76, P < 0.001) and venous thromboembolism (odds ratio 0.69, P < 0.001) compared to non-alcoholic cirrhosis. Portal vein thrombosis contributed to increased mortality (odds ratio 1.19, P < 0.001) in alcoholic cirrhosis. Portal vein thrombosis prevalence among alcoholic cirrhosis increased while mortality declined during the study period.

CONCLUSION

Thrombotic events including portal vein thrombosis and venous thromboembolism were found in less frequent association with alcoholic cirrhosis compared with non-alcoholic cirrhosis. Despite this, the higher in-hospital mortality found among portal vein thrombosis with alcoholic cirrhosis should prompt careful consideration of management.

Liver transplantation in patients with portal vein thrombosis: A strategic road map throughout management

BACKGROUND

Liver transplantation in the setting of portal vein thrombosis is an intricate issue that occasionally necessitates extraordinary procedures for portal flow restoration. However, to date, there is no consensus on a persistent management strategy, particularly with extensive forms. This work aims to introduce our experience-based surgical management algorithm for portal vein thrombosis during liver transplantation and to clarify some of the debatable circumstances associated with this problematic issue.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2019, 494 adults underwent liver transplantation at our institute. Ninety patients had preoperative portal vein thrombosis, and 79 patients underwent living donor liver transplantation. Our algorithm trichotomized the management plan into 3 pathways based on portal vein thrombosis grade. The surgical procedures implemented included thrombectomy, interposition vein grafts, jump grafts from the superior mesenteric vein, jump grafts from a collateral and renoportal anastomosis in 56, 13, 11, 4, and 2 patients, respectively. Four patients with mural thrombi did not require any special intervention.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients experienced posttransplant portal vein complications. They all proved to have a patent portal vein by the end of follow-up regardless of the management modality. No significant survival difference was observed between cohorts with versus without portal vein thrombosis. The early graft loss rate was significantly higher with advanced grades (P = .048) as well as technically demanding procedures (P = .032).

CONCLUSION

A stepwise broad-minded strategy should always be adopted when approaching advanced portal vein thrombosis during liver transplantation. An industrious preoperative evaluation should always be carried out to locate the ideal reliable source for portal flow restoration.

New Insights into the Pathogenesis, Risk Factors, and Treatment of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Patients with Cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent event in patients with cirrhosis regardless of etiology. Notwithstanding the commonality of the problem, the pathophysiology and risk factors for PVT in cirrhosis are largely unknown. The clinical impact of PVT in the natural history of cirrhosis is unclear, indications for PVT treatment are not well defined, and treatment recommendations are based on experts' opinion and consensus only. Therefore, this review aims to summarize current knowledge of mechanisms and risk factors for PVT development and assess the current evidence of PVT management, with a special focus on strategies of anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement.

The Spectrum of Disease Severity in Cirrhosis and Its Implications for Hemostasis

Bleeding and thrombosis are both common complications that patients with advanced liver disease experience. While hemostatic pathways remain largely intact with cirrhosis, this balance can quickly shift in the direction of bleeding or clotting in an unpredictable manner. A growing body of literature is attempting to shed light on difficult scenarios that clinicians often face, ranging from predicting and mitigating bleeding risk in those who need invasive procedures to determining the best strategies to manage both bleeding and thrombotic complications when they occur. Studies examining hemostasis in those with advanced liver disease, however, often include heterogeneous cohorts with varied methodology. While these studies often select a cohort of all types and degrees of cirrhosis, emerging evidence suggests significant differences in underlying systemic inflammation and hemostatic abnormalities among specific phenotypes of liver disease, ranging from compensated cirrhosis to decompensated cirrhosis and acute-on-chronic liver failure. It is paramount that future studies account for these differing disease severities if we hope to address the many critical knowledge gaps in this field.

Update on Shunt Surgery

Background

Bleeding from esophagogastric varices is a life-threatening complication from portal hypertension. It occurs in 15% of patients and has a mortality rate of 20-35%.

Summary

The primary therapy for variceal bleeding is medical. In cases of recurrent bleeding, a definitive therapy is required. In cases of parenchymal decompensation, liver transplantation is the causal therapy, but if liver function is preserved, portal decompression is the therapy of choice. The use of the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has achieved widespread acceptance, although evidence for surgical shunts is comparable or better in patients with good hepatic reserve. The type of surgical shunt depends on the patent veins of the portomesenteric system. If total occlusion is present, a devascularization procedure might be indicated.

Key Messages

Therapy, taking into account liver function, morphology of the portovenous system, and imminent liver transplantation, should be performed by an interdisciplinary team of gastroenterologists, interventional radiologists, and gastrointestinal surgeons.

Research Progress in Chinese Medicine Preparations for Promoting Blood Circulation and Removing Blood Stasis for Cirrhotic Patients with Portal Vein Thrombosis Following Splenectomy

This article presented an overview of the therapeutic effects of Chinese medicine (CM) preparations for promoting blood circulation and removing blood stasis for patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) after splenectomy. Based on published clinical researches of CM preparations for PVT after splenectomy in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension (CPH), this paper evaluated the incidence of PVT, and explored potential active components and mechanisms of CM preparations. Safflower Yellow Injection, Danshen Injection () Danhong Injection (), and Compound Danshen Dropping Pill () achieved good curative effect alone or combined with anticoagulant therapy. In addition, Compound Biejia Ruangan Tablet () and Anluo Huaxian Pill () can also significantly improve the hemodynamic disorders of portal vein system in patients with cirrhosis. Considering the role of CM preparations in ameliorating the incidence of PVT after splenectomy in patients with CPH, we suggested that future research should provide more attention to CM alone or CM combined with anticoagulant for cirrhosis with PVT.