Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with 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.

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.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Cirrhotic Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Update of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prevention of ischemic stroke is an essential part of managing atrial fibrillation (AF). In recent years, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have emerged as an alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Little is understood regarding the efficacy and safety of DOACs in AF patients with liver cirrhosis (LC).

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis is designed to evaluate the benefits and risks of DOACs compared to VKAs in AF patients with concomitant LC.

METHODS

A thorough search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and CNKI databases up to February 2023. A total of seven clinical studies including 7551 patients were analyzed in this meta-analysis. All data analyses were performed using Review Manager software version 5.3.

RESULTS

Regarding efficacy outcomes, DOACs had comparable clinical benefit in reducing ischemic stroke/systemic thromboembolism (HR=0.79, 95% CI [0.59, 1.06], p = 0.12) to VKAs. The incidence of all-cause death was similar between the DOACs and VKAs group (HR 0.94, 95% CI [0.69, 1.28], p = 0.69). Regarding safety outcomes, DOACs were associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (HR 0.61, 95% CI [0.50, 0.75], p < 0.00001), intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.55, 95% CI [0.31, 0.98], p = 0.04) and major gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.66, 95% CI [0.51, 0.85], p = 0.001) than VKAs. Additional subgroup analysis of advanced cirrhosis revealed that DOACs were associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding (HR 0.59, 95% CI [0.39, 0.89], p = 0.01) than VKAs. There were no significant differences between the DOACs and VKAs group concerning the incidence of ischemic stroke/systemic thromboembolism (HR 1.38, 95% CI [0.75, 2.55], p = 0.31) and major gastrointestinal bleeding (HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.41, 1.04], p = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

DOACs are associated with more favorable safety outcomes and may be a feasible option of oral anticoagulant for individuals with atrial fibrillation and cirrhosis. Pending validation by randomized prospective studies, the findings of this study should be interpreted with caution.

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

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is associated with a higher risk of liver-related complications. Recent guidelines recommend direct-acting anticoagulants (DOAC) in patients with cirrhosis and non-tumoral PVT. However, data on the efficacy and safety of DOAC in these patients remain limited. We aim to investigate the efficacy and safety of DOAC compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to treat non-tumoral PVT in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of six electronic databases using MeSH term and free text. We selected all studies comparing the use of DOACs with vitamin K antagonist to treat PVT in cirrhosis. The primary outcome was PVT recanalization. Secondary outcomes were and PVT progression, major bleeding, variceal bleeding and death.

RESULTS

From 944 citations, we included 552 subjects from a total of 11 studies (10 observational and 1 randomized trial) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. We found that DOAC were associated with a higher pooled rate of PVT recanalization (RR = 1.67, 95%CI: 1.02, 2.74, I² = 79%) and lower pooled risk of PVT progression (RR = 0.14, 95%CI: 0.03-0.57, I² = 0%). The pooled risk of major bleeding (RR = 0.29, 95%CI: 0.08-1.01, I² = 0%), variceal bleeding (RR = 1.29, 95%CI: 0.64-2.59, I² = 0%) and death (RR = 0.31, 95%CI: 0.01-9.578, I² = 80%) was similar between DOAC and VKA.

CONCLUSION

For the treatment of PVT in patients with cirrhosis, the bleeding risk was comparable between DOAC and VKA. However, DOAC were associated with a higher pooled rate of PVT recanalization. Dedicated randomized studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Direct Oral Anticoagulants versus Vitamin K Antagonists in Patients Aged 80 Years and Older

The effectiveness of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) is non-inferior to vitamin K antagonists (VKA) to treat atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism (VTE). In this cross-sectional study, we compared older persons taking DOACs to those taking VKAs. We included ambulatory individuals ≥80 years, affiliated to Mutualité Sociale Agricole of Burgundy, who were refunded for a medical prescription in September 2017. The demographic conditions, registered chronic diseases (RCD), and number and types of prescribed drugs were compared in the DOAC group and VKA group. Of the 3190 included individuals, 1279 (40%) were prescribed DOACs and 1911 (60%) VKAs. Individuals taking VKAs were older than those taking DOACs (87.11 vs. 86.35 years). In the DOAC group, there were more women (51.92% vs. 48.25%) (p = 0.043), less RCD (89.60% vs. 92.73%) (p = 0.002), less VTE (1.80% vs. 6.59%), less severe heart failure (58.09% vs. 67.87%), less severe hypertension (18.22% vs. 23.60%), less severe kidney diseases (1.49% vs. 3.82%), and fewer drugs per prescription (6.15 vs. 6.66) (p < 0.01 for all). The DOAC group were also less likely to be taking angiotensin receptor blockers (10.79% vs. 13.97%), furosemide (40.81% vs. 49.66%) or digoxin (10.32% vs. 13.66%) than the VKA group (p = 0.009, p < 0.001, and p = 0.005). DOACs were less prescribed than VKAs. Individuals taking VKAs were older and had more severe comorbidities and more drugs per prescription than those taking DOACs.

Safety of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate major bleeding in cirrhosis with use of traditional anticoagulation or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), using a standardized definition. Anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis is often a clinical conundrum for providers as the necessary balance between thrombotic and bleeding risk is complicated by end organ damage. Recent meta-analyses have sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with liver disease. These recent analyses are limited by various bleeding definitions, broad inclusion criteria, and few indications for anticoagulation. We sought to conduct a meta-analysis using a validated definition for major bleeding and compare rates between traditional anticoagulation and DOACs in patients with cirrhosis. Articles were eligible for inclusion if the international society on thrombosis and hemostasis (ISTH) definition of a major bleed was the primary safety outcome. Additionally, only articles including patients with cirrhosis and receiving treatment with anticoagulation for an indication for stroke prevention or venous thromboembolism were eligible. Eligible articles needed a DOAC comparator group against traditional anticoagulant medication. Seven studies met inclusion criteria and compiled data for 683 patients in the meta-analysis. Pooled trial analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in the primary outcome of ISTH major bleeding (OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.28-1.07, I² 0%). Individual secondary outcomes of all bleeding, intracerebral hemorrhage, or gastrointestinal bleeding also demonstrated no significant difference between DOACs and traditional anticoagulation. Use of DOACs in patients with mild to moderate cirrhosis carries similar risk to use of traditional anticoagulation.

2020 Clinical Update in Liver Transplantation

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

Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Liver Disease in the Era of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease Global Epidemic: A Narrative Review

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are highly prevalent and relevant healthcare issues. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are now the first-choice for anticoagulant treatment of these conditions displaying a better efficacy/safety profile than vitamin-K antagonists, mainly due to significantly reduced risk of major bleeding, especially of intracranial haemorrhage. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common liver disease in developed countries showing a continuously growing prevalence. Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), its evolutive form, will be the leading cause for liver transplantation by 2020. NAFLD is independently associated with an increased risk of abnormalities of cardiac structure and function, including cardiac rhythm disorders (mainly AF). Moreover, data suggest an increased risk of unprovoked VTE associated with NAFLD/NASH. Therefore, a growing number of patients with chronic liver disease (CLD) will be candidate for anticoagulant therapy in the near future. Cirrhosis of any etiology is characterized by an unstable thrombosis/bleeding haemostatic balance, making anticoagulant therapy particularly challenging in this condition. Given that patients with significant active liver disease and cirrhosis were excluded from all pivotal randomized controlled trials on DOACs, this comprehensive review aims at critically discussing real-world evidence, including the latest population studies, regarding the use of DOACs in patients with CLD/cirrhosis.