Causes of portal venous thrombosis in cirrhotic patients: the role of genetic and acquired factors

Prevalence and risk factors for cirrhotic cardiomyopathy: a prospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess cardiac structure and function in patients with cirrhosis, to investigate the prevalence of cirrhotic cardiomyopathy (CCM) in patients with cirrhosis of different etiologies and to analyze the risk factors for the development of CCM.

METHODS

This study selected cirrhotic patients aged 18-75 years who were hospitalized in Qilu Hospital of Shandong University. Patients with known heart disease, chronic lung disease, severe renal insufficiency, malignancy, thyroid disease, hypertension, diabetes or pregnancy were excluded. A total of 131 patients with cirrhosis were finally included. Based on the results of echocardiography, patients who met the diagnostic definition of CCM were included in the CCM group, otherwise, they were classified as the non-CCM group. The demographic and clinical data of the two groups were compared, and the clinical characteristics and risk factors of CCM were evaluated.

RESULTS

The overall prevalence of CCM was 24.4%, and the occurrence of CCM was not related to the etiology of liver cirrhosis. The prevalence of CCM was significantly higher among cirrhotic patients complicated with ascites (31.4% vs. 16.4%; P  = 0.046) or with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) (42.9% vs. 17.1%; P  = 0.003). Older age [odds ratio (OR) = 1.058; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.005-1.113; P  = 0.032] and PVT (OR = 2.999; 95% CI, 1.194-7.533; P  = 0.019) were independent risk factors for the development of CCM.

CONCLUSION

The prevalence of CCM in cirrhotic patients was 24.4%, and the occurrence of CCM was not related to the etiology of cirrhosis. The prevalence of CCM was higher in cirrhotic patients with ascites or PVT. Older age and PVT are independent risk factors for CCM, but validation in larger sample studies is still needed.

Assessment of portal system hemodynamics for the prediction of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis-A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The pathogenesis of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhosis is multifactorial, with altered hemodynamics being proposed as a possible contributor. The present systematic review was conducted to study the role of assessment of portal hemodynamics for the prediction of PVT in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

Three databases (Medline, Embase, and Scopus) were searched from inception to February 2023 for studies comparing portal venous system parameters in patients with cirrhosis developing PVT with those not. Results were presented as mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 31 studies (patients with cirrhosis: 19 studies, patients with cirrhosis undergoing splenectomy: 12 studies) were included. On pooling the data from multivariable analyses of the included studies, a larger portal vein diameter was a significant predictor of PVT in patients with cirrhosis without or with splenectomy with OR 1.74 (1.12-2.69) and OR 1.55 (1.26-1.92), respectively. On the other hand, a lower portal vein velocity (PVV) was a significant predictor of PVT in cirrhotics without or with splenectomy with OR 0.93 (0.91-0.96) and OR 0.71 (0.61-0.83), respectively. A PVV of <15 cm/s was the most commonly used cut-off for the prediction of PVT. Patients developing PVT also had a significantly higher splenic length, thickness, and splenic vein velocity.

CONCLUSION

The assessment of portal hemodynamic parameters at baseline evaluation in patients with cirrhosis may predict the development of PVT. Further studies are required to determine the optimal cut-offs for various parameters.

Management of splanchnic vein thrombosis

The expression splanchnic vein thrombosis encompasses Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis. These disorders have common characteristics: they are both rare diseases which can cause portal hypertension and its complications. Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis in the absence of underlying liver disease share many risk factors, among which myeloproliferative neoplasms represent the most common; a rapid comprehensive work-up for risk factors of thrombosis is needed in these patients. Long-term anticoagulation is indicated in most patients. Portal vein thrombosis can also develop in patients with cirrhosis and in those with porto-sinusoidal vascular liver disease. The presence and nature of underlying liver disease impacts the management of portal vein thrombosis. Indications for anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis are growing, while transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is now a second-line option. Due to the rarity of these diseases, studies yielding high-grade evidence are scarce. However, collaborative studies have provided new insight into the management of these patients. This article focuses on the causes, diagnosis, and management of patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome, portal vein thrombosis without underlying liver disease, or cirrhosis with non-malignant portal vein thrombosis.

Shedding Light on the Pathogenesis of Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis

Splanchnic vein thrombosis is a rare but potentially life-threatening manifestation of venous thromboembolism, with challenging implications both at the pathological and therapeutic level. It is frequently associated with liver cirrhosis, but it could also be provoked by myeloproliferative disorders, cancer of various gastroenterological origin, abdominal infections and thrombophilia. A portion of splanchnic vein thrombosis is still classified as idiopathic. Here, we review the mechanisms of splanchnic vein thrombosis, including new insights on the role of clonal hematopoiesis in idiopathic SVT pathogenesis, with important implications from the therapeutic standpoint.

Portal Vein Thrombosis in the Setting of Cirrhosis: A Comprehensive Review

Portal vein thrombosis constitutes the most common thrombotic event in patients with cirrhosis, with increased rates in the setting of advanced liver disease. Despite being a well-known complication of cirrhosis, the contribution of portal vein thrombosis to hepatic decompensation and overall mortality is still a matter of debate. The incorporation of direct oral anticoagulants and new radiological techniques for portal vein recanalization have expanded our therapeutic arsenal. However, the lack of large prospective observational studies and randomized trials explain the heterogenous diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations of current guidelines. This article seeks to make a comprehensive review of the pathophysiology, clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment of portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis.

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 Pathophysiology of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis: Getting Deeper into Virchow's Triad

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication among patients with cirrhosis. However, its pathophysiology is not well established and there are currently very few predictive factors, none of which are actually useful, from a clinical perspective. The contribution of each of the vertices of Virchow’s triad, e.g., blood hypercoagulability, blood flow, and portal vein endothelial damage in the development of PVT is not clear. In this review, we aim to recapitulate the latest studies on the field of PVT development in order to understand its mechanisms and discuss some of the future directions in the study of this important complication of cirrhosis.

Splanchnic vein thrombosis-related mortality in the Veneto region (Italy), 2008-2019: Retrospective analysis of epidemiological data

BACKGROUND

Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is an uncommon manifestation of venous thromboembolism. Epidemiological data on SVT-related mortality rate is not available to date.

METHODS

We investigated time trends in SVT-related mortality rate, 2008-2019, in Veneto, an Italian high-income region of approximatively 5,000,000 inhabitants. SVT-related deaths were identified by the following ICD-10 codes: I81 (portal vein thrombosis), K75.1 (phlebitis of portal vein), K76.3 (liver infarction), K76.5 (hepatic veno-occlusive disease) or I82.0 (Budd-Chiari syndrome).

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 557,932 deaths were recorded. SVT was reported in 823 cases; 776 (94%) consisted of portal vein thrombosis. The age-standardized SVT-related mortality rate varied from 1.47 (year 2008) to 1.52 (year 2019) per 100,000 person-years. An increase in the cause-specific annual mortality rate was observed in women (0.56 in 2008 to 1.04 per 100,000 person-years in 2019; average annual percent change +5.7%, 95%CI +3.1; +8.3%). In men, the cause-specific mortality rate moved from 2.53 in 2008 to 2.03 per 100,000 person-years in 2019 (average annual percent change -1.2%, 95%CI -4.0; +1.6%). After conditioning for age and sex, the odds of having a concomitant liver disease were higher for SVT-related deaths (OR 31.6; 95%CI 17.1-37.0) compared with non-SVT-related deaths. This also applies to gastrointestinal cancers (OR 1.28; 95%CI 1.07-1.55), although to a lesser extent.

CONCLUSIONS

We report first epidemiological estimates of SVT-related mortality in a Western country. These values will serve as a reference to weight novel potential factors associated with SVT-related death and interpret them from an epidemiological perspective.

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.

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.

Portal Thrombosis in Cirrhosis: Role of Thrombophilic Disorders

In patients with liver cirrhosis the contribution of inherited and acquired prothrombotic disorders in the development of non-malignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is inconclusive. The purpose of this retrospective study was to examine the prevalence of thrombophilia in this setting at our center from January 2012 to November 2019. Tests included gene mutational analysis for Factor V Leiden, prothrombin G20210A, JAK2 (V617F), Calreticulin (CARL), in addition to activated protein C resistance, antithrombin III, protein C and S levels, and antiphospholipid antibodies. We included 77 patients, six of whom (7.8%) had a thrombophilic disorder: antiphospholipid syndrome in four patients, prothrombin gene mutation in one and factor V Leiden mutation in one. This latter patient had also been diagnosed with polycythemia vera years before PVT development. Complete thrombosis of the main portal vein and re-thrombosis after stopping anticoagulation were more frequent in patients with thrombophilia, but the rates of recanalization under anticoagulant therapy were similar among groups. No other difference was accounted between groups. The low prevalence of acquired and inherited thrombophilia found in patients with cirrhosis and PVT support testing for these disorders on an individual basis and avoiding universal screening to reduce costs and unwarranted testing.

Homocysteine Serum Levels as Prognostic Marker of Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Portal Vein Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of endstage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of Homocysteine (Hcy) in HCC patient with PVT. Hcy is a sulphur amino-acid involved in two pathways, trans-sulphuration and remethylation, that involve vitamins B6, B12 and folates.

METHODS

We recruited 54 patients with HCC and PVT, 60 patients with HCC and without PVT and 60 control subjects. We measured serum levels of Hcy, folate, vitamins B6 and B12.

RESULTS

The comparison between HCC patients with PVT versus HCC without PVT was shown that mean values of Hcy were 6.4 nmol/L (p<0.0073) higher, LDL cholesterol were 4.8 mg/dl (p<0.0079) lower, vitamin B6 were 4.6 nmol/L(p=0.0544) lower, vitamins B 12 were 22.1 pg/ml (p=0.0001) lower.

CONCLUSION

High serum levels of Hcy are an established thrombotic risk factor in the general population. We found significantly higher levels of Hcy in HCC patients with PVT versus both HCC patients without PVT and controls.

Acute Portal Vein Thrombosis Predicts Concomitant Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma in Cirrhotic Patients

PURPOSE

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common condition in cirrhotic patients and mostly attributed to portal hypertension. The objective of our study was to examine the association of PVT with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed to identify cirrhotic patients with thrombosis of the portal system. Clinical and laboratory characteristics were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients were identified. Twenty-four out of 39 patients with PVT did not develop HCC (group A) after follow-up time of 38.5 months from the diagnosis of PVT. Eight patients (20.5%) were diagnosed with HCC within two weeks following diagnosis of PVT (group B). Seven patients (17.9%) were diagnosed with tumor thrombus (group C) at time of PVT diagnosis. The average age was 53.5, 66.5, and 69 years for groups A, B, and C respectively. Most patients (75 and 87.5% for groups B and C respectively) diagnosed with PVT and HCC were males. The most common cause of cirrhosis in groups B and C was chronic hepatitis B virus infection (HBV) in 62.5% and 50% respectively. The most common clinical presentation of PVT in group A was abdominal pain in 55.5% compared to new/worsening ascites in 43% and 37.5% for groups B and C respectively. The platelet count in groups B and C was higher as compared to that in group A (126 and 125 vs. 107 thousand, P = NS).

CONCLUSION

In 38.4% of cases, new diagnosis of PVT was associated with concomitant diagnosis of HCC. Identifiable risk factors were chronic HBV infection and higher platelet count.

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

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

Safety of variceal band ligation in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis treated with anticoagulant therapy: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Anticoagulant therapy has been recommended in patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis especially in candidates for liver transplantation. These patients are also likely to need variceal band ligation. This study aimed to assess the incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding after elective variceal band ligation in patients with cirrhosis receiving anticoagulant therapy for portal vein thrombosis.

METHODS

Patients with cirrhosis and nontumoral portal vein thrombosis treated with anticoagulant therapy undergoing elective variceal band ligation were retrospectively included. We recorded upper gastrointestinal bleeding events occurring within two weeks after variceal band ligation. Postvariceal band ligation bleeding was defined as active bleeding on at least one site of previous ligation at endoscopy.

RESULTS

Between 2014 and 2017, 32 patients with cirrhosis had scheduled variceal band ligations while on anticoagulant therapy [men 75%; median age 59 years; aetiology of cirrhosis: alcohol (50%), viral (34%), alcohol and viral (16%); and Child-Pugh score: A (31%), B (44%), and C (25%)]. Three (9%) patients presented postvariceal band ligation bleeding during the follow-up. None of these events led to haemorrhagic shock or death. Factors associated with postvariceal band ligation bleeding included variceal band ligation performed as secondary prophylaxis (P = 0.05) and previous decompensation of cirrhosis (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

In this small group of patients under anticoagulation therapy undergoing variceal band ligation, only a minority presented postendoscopic bleeding of minor importance. Nevertheless, particular attention should be paid to patients with previous decompensation of cirrhosis.

Inherited thrombophilia and portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is common in cirrhosis. PVT is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Individual reports suggest that PVT occurs more frequently in patients with cirrhosis and inherited thrombophilia. The relationship between cirrhosis, PVT development, and inherited thrombophilia was explored in this study. The aim of the study was to determine whether cirrhotic patients with nontumoral PVT have an increased rate of inherited thrombophilia.

METHODS

Studies were identified by searching electronic databases up to October 2017 with English language and human subject restrictions. Two independent reviewers screened citations and extracted data. Magnitude of effect was calculated to obtain aggregate estimates of effect size and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Between-study variability and heterogeneity were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 2893 citations identified, 9 studies composed of 1929 subjects with cirrhosis were included. The overall prevalence of PVT was 6.5% (n = 125). Both prothrombin G20210A mutation (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% CI, 1.07-5.53; P = 0.03) and factor V Leiden (FVL) (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.06-3.68; P = 0.03) were significantly associated with PVT risk. Methyltetrahydrofolate reductase C677T mutation was not associated with increased PVT risk. No heterogeneity or publication bias was observed. One important study with opposite findings could not be included due to lack of primary data.

CONCLUSIONS

FVL and PTG20210A mutation were associated with increased PVT risk in patients with cirrhosis. This finding reframes the role of inherited thrombophilia in PVT development in patients with cirrhosis. Future prospective studies investigating screening for inherited thrombophilia in all cirrhosis patients with PVT seem warranted.

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

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

A prediction model for successful anticoagulation in cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication in cirrhosis, and when complete, it increases morbidity and mortality in liver transplant candidates. The aim of the study was to assess the hemostatic status, as well as clinical characteristics of thrombus and patients, as predictors of therapeutic efficacy of anticoagulation for the treatment of PVT in cirrhotics.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with cirrhosis consecutively treated for PVT with enoxaparin were enrolled. All patients underwent evaluation of coagulation status and thrombophilia screening. Thrombus characteristics and extension were evaluated at baseline and during follow-up. Anticoagulation was continued until recanalization or up to 12 months. Variables correlated with the response to anticoagulation were used to create a predictive score that was validated in an external multicenter cohort.

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients were included and had partial PVT in most cases (72%). Treatment with enoxaparin resulted in an overall response rate of 66% (43/65) after a median time of 4.4 months and 76% (33/43) within the first 6 months. At multivariate analysis, efficacy of anticoagulation correlated with the severity of liver disease, complete verus partial PVT, age of the thrombus, and time interval from treatment start (<6 months). The areas under the curve of the statistical model for predicting the response to anticoagulation were 0.84 and 0.76 for the training (n=65) and validation (n=60) cohorts, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Early diagnosis and early treatment are key factors for the successful management of PVT in cirrhosis, so that screening of PVT and prompt start of anticoagulant treatment should be mandatory.

Long-Term Outcome of Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

Introduction

Little is known about the long-term outcome of cirrhotic patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT). This prospective cohort study aimed to describe the clinical presentation, bleeding incidence, thrombotic events, and mortality in patients with SVT associated with cirrhosis.

Methods

Among 604 consecutive patients with SVT enrolled over 2 years, 149 had cirrhosis. Major bleeding, thrombotic events, and all-cause mortality were recorded during a 2-year follow-up. In a subgroup, the degree of recanalization with or without anticoagulation therapy, and the correlation between clinical events and liver disease severity were also investigated.

Results

The most common thrombosis sites were the portal (88%) and mesenteric veins (34%). At presentation, 50% of patients were asymptomatic. Anticoagulation was administered to 92/149 patients for a median of 6.5 months. Vessel recanalization was documented in 47/98 patients with a radiological follow-up. Anticoagulation was associated with a 3.33-fold higher of recanalization rate, and a lower recurrent thrombosis rate, while patients with and without anticoagulation experienced a similar rate of major bleeding episodes. Mortality rates were 6.8 per 100 patient-years for patients with thrombosis completely or partially resolving during the follow-up, and 15.4 per 100 patient-years for those with stable or progressing thrombosis. An impact of SVT on survival was only apparent in patients with more advanced liver disease (Child–Pugh B-C).

Conclusions

Patients with SVT and cirrhosis have a substantial long-term risk of recurrent thrombotic events, which is reduced by anticoagulation therapy without any increase in bleeding risk. Anticoagulation can improve the likelihood of vessel recanalization, and is associated with a lower risk of death for decompensated patients.

Anticoagulation treatment of portal vein thrombosis in a patient with cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation: A case report

RATIONALE

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is relatively common in patients with liver cirrhosis waiting for liver transplantation (LT). Anticoagulation is an important non-invasive treatment strategy for patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

PATIENT CONCERNS

This is the case of a 51-year-old man who presented with cryptogenic liver cirrhosis associated with ascites. Computed tomography (CT) and Doppler ultrasonography (US) showed a partially obstructive thrombus of the portal vein (Yerdel Grade II).

DIAGNOSIS

Portal vein thrombosis (Yerdel Grade II); liver cirrhosis.

INTERVENTIONS

The PVT was completely recanalized after 4 months of treatment with the low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) medication enoxaparin but discontinuation of anticoagulants led to PVT recurrence. The patient's condition deteriorated, even though re-treating the anticoagulation with enoxaparin significantly reduced the PVT.

OUTCOMES

The thrombus was removed by a thrombectomy and LT was performed successfully without any vascular complications.

LESSONS

Patients with cirrhosis and PVT who are waiting LT can be effectively treated with LMWH anticoagulants. Careful use of anticoagulation is generally safe. Early initiation of anticoagulation treatment may be associated with a high rate of portal vein recanalization.

Significance of measured intraoperative portal vein flows after thrombendvenectomy in deceased donor liver transplantations with portal vein thrombosis

Adequate portal vein (PV) flow in liver transplantation is essential for a good outcome, and it may be compromised in patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). This study evaluated the impact of intraoperatively measured PV flow after PV thrombendvenectomy on outcomes after deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT). The study included 77 patients over a 16-year period who underwent PV thrombendvenectomy with complete flow data. Patients were classified into 2 groups: high PV flow (>1300 mL/minute; n = 55) and low PV flow (≤1300 mL/minute; n = 22). Postoperative complications and graft survival were analyzed according to the PV flow. The 2 groups were similar in demographic characteristics. Low PV flow was associated with higher cumulative rates of biliary strictures (P = 0.02) and lower 1-, 2-, and 5-year graft survival (89%, 85%, and 68% versus 64%, 55%, and 38%, respectively; P = 0.002). There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative PVT between the groups (1.8% versus 9.1%; P = 0.19). No biliary leaks or hepatic artery thromboses were reported in either group. By multivariate analyses, age >60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.04, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-6.82; P = 0.007) and low portal flow (HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.15-4.65; P = 0.02) were associated with worse survival. In conclusion, PV flow <1300 mL/minute after PV thrombendvenectomy for PVT during DDLT was associated with higher rates of biliary strictures and worse graft survival. Consideration should be given to identifying reasons for low flow and performing maneuvers to increase PV flow when intraoperative PV flows are <1300 mL/minute. Liver Transplantation 23 1032-1039 2017 AASLD.

Thromboelastometry hypercoagulable profiles and portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Cirrhotic patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) exhibit hypercoagulability.

AIM

We investigated whether thromboelastometry can detect hypercoagulability in these patients and the association with portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

METHODS

At baseline, cirrhotic patients with and without HCC underwent thromboelastometry. PVT onset was recorded over a 12-month follow-up period.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients (41 with and 35 without HCC) were included. Vital tumor volume (VTV) was  >5cm³ in 18 patients. Fibrinogen was higher in HCC patients with VTV>5cm³ as compared to those with VTV≤5cm³ and those without HCC. Mean platelet count was significantly increased in HCC patients compared with non-HCC. At baseline thromboelastometry, HCC patients showed shorter CTF and higher MCF than non-HCC. PVT incidence was 24,4% and 11.4% in patients with (10/41) and without (4/35) HCC, respectively. Among HCC, 50% of PVT occurred in Child A patients. In HCC, FIBTEM MCF>25mm was associated with a 5-fold increased PVT risk [RR: 4.8 (2-11.3); p=0.0001]. Cox multivariate analysis confirmed HCC and increased MCF (FIBTEM) to be independently associated with increased PVT risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypercoagulability in HCC which can be detected by thromboelastometry is associated with increased risk of PVT even in Child A patients. The clinical implication of these findings deserves further investigation.

Role of Hyperhomocysteinemia and Methylene Tetrahydrofolate Reductase C677T Polymorphism in Idiopathic Portal Vein Thrombosis

Purpose:

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a rare and life-threatening vascular disorder characterized by obstruction or narrowing of the portal vein. Hyperhomocysteinemia and methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T polymorphism has been studied in PVT patients with conflicting results. In the present study the association of hyperhomocysteinemia and MTHFR C677T polymorphism with PVT risk was investigated in Iranians.

Materials and Methods:

Our study population consisted of 10 idiopathic PVT patients and 80 healthy control subjects matched for age and sex. MTHFR C677T polymorphism was genotyped by the polymerase chain reaction technique combined with restriction enzyme fragment length polymorphism (PCR-RFLP) technique and plasma total homocysteine (tHcy) levels were determined by enzyme immunoassay method.

Results:

Mean plasma tHcy levels were significantly higher in PVT patients (20.2±6.8) than control subjects (10.9±4.7) (P=0.001). Moreover, plasma tHcy levels were significantly higher in 677T allele carriers relative to 677C allele carriers in both PVT patients (P=0.01) and control subjects (P=0.03). Neither homozygote nor heterozygote genotypes of MTHFR C677T polymorphism correlated significantly with PVT risk (P>0.05). Moreover, MTHFR C677T polymorphism didn’t increase the risk of PVT under dominant (CT+TT vs. CC) or recessive (TT vs. CC+CT) genetic models analyzed (P>0.05). The difference in frequency of minor 677T allele between PVT patients and control subjects was not statistically significant (P>0.05).

Conclusion:

Based on the current study, we suggest that hyperhomocysteinemia constitutes a significant and common risk factor for PVT. Also, MTHFR C677T polymorphism is not a risk factor for PVT but is a contributing factor for elevated plasma tHcy levels.

Hyperhomocysteinemia and MTHFR C677T polymorphism in patients with portal vein thrombosis complicating liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is serious complication of liver cirrhosis (LC), especially in the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The liver plays a key role in homocysteine (Hcy) metabolism: mild hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy) has been described in LC. HHcy is a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis. Methylen-tetrahydrofolate-reductase (MTHFR) C677T polymorphism is the commonest determinant of mild HHcy and has been involved also in cancer development.

AIM

To investigate a possible relation between HHcy, MTHFR status, HCC and PVT in patients affected by LC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

100 patients affected by LC, 38 with (PVT group, 24 with HCC) and 62 without PVT (LC group, 14 with HCC) sex-, age-, liver disease stage and etiology-matched were assessed for thrombophilia, smoking status, plasma Hcy, MTHFRC677T polymorphism and homocysteine-related vitamin status.

RESULTS

A higher prevalence of HCC, HHcy and MTHFR TT status was observed in PVT group. No significant difference in vitamin status was observed between groups. Patients with HCC showed significantly higher plasma Hcy and higher prevalence of HHcy than patients without HCC. They had also higher prevalence of MTHFR TT status. In patients with TT status (n=11) and HCC, 10 had HHcy e 9 had PVT.

CONCLUSIONS

Mild HHcy is associated to LC may have a role in PVT development and assessment of plasma Hcy may be suggested in patients with LC (especially if complicated by HCC). Association between HCC and MTHFR TT status is intriguing, due the postulated role for this polymorphism in cancer: it may represent a possible link between HCC and PVT.

Nontumoral portal vein thrombosis in patients awaiting liver transplantation

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) occurs in approximately 2%-26% of the patients awaiting liver transplantation (LT) and is no longer an absolute contraindication for LT. Nearly half of PVT cases are accidentally found during the LT procedure. The most important risk factor for PVT development in cirrhosis may be the severity of liver disease and reduced portal blood flow. Whether other inherited or acquired coagulation disorders also play a role is not yet clear. The development of PVT may have no effect on the liver disease progression, especially when it is nonocclusive. PVT may not increase the risk of wait-list mortality, but it is a risk factor for poor early post-LT mortality. Anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) are 2 major treatment strategies for patients with PVT on the waiting list. The complete recanalization rate after anticoagulation is approximately 40%. The role of TIPS to maintain PV patency for LT as the primary indication has been reported, but the safety and efficacy should be further evaluated. PVT extension and degree may determine the surgical technique to be used during LT. If a "conventional" end-to-end portal anastomotic technique is used, there is not a major impact on post-LT survival. Post-LT PVT can significantly reduce both graft and patient survival after LT and can preclude future options for re-LT.

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

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis is a fairly common and potentially life-threatening complication in patients with liver cirrhosis. The risk factors for portal vein thrombosis in these patients are still not fully understood.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the associations between various risk factors in cirrhotic patients and the development of portal vein thrombosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this case-control study performed at the Shiraz organ transplantation center, Iran, we studied 219 patients (> 18 years old) with liver cirrhosis, who were awaiting liver transplants in our unit, from November 2010 to May 2011. The patients were evaluated by history, physical examination, and laboratory tests, including factor V Leiden, prothrombin gene mutation, Janus Kinase 2 (JAK2) mutation, and serum levels of protein C, protein S, antithrombin III, homocysteine, factor VIII, and anticardiolipin antibodies.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the assessed hypercoagulable states between patients with or without portal vein thrombosis. A history of previous variceal bleeding with subsequent endoscopic treatment in patients with portal vein thrombosis was significantly higher than in those without it (P = 0.013, OR: 2.526, 95% CI: 1.200 - 5.317).

CONCLUSIONS

In our population of cirrhotic patients, treatment of variceal bleeding predisposed the patients to portal vein thrombosis, but hypercoagulable disorders by themselves were not associated with portal vein thrombosis.

De-novo portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis: risk factors and correlation with the Model for End-stage Liver Disease scoring system

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a potential lethal complication in late liver cirrhosis. There is a lack of knowledge of the clinical features and risk factors of PVT. We aimed to investigate the clinical and radiological characteristics, and biochemical markers of cirrhotic patients to determine the high-risk individuals for PVT attending our center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Of 426 cirrhotic patients, only 120 consecutive patients were included. Clinical, biochemical, immunological, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, portal vein patency, and flow velocity were measured in all patients at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. Variables that could predict the development of PVT within 1 year were identified by multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Only 95 patients completed the study; PVT was found in 17 (17.9%) patients. PVT was observed mainly in the portal trunk, superior mesenteric vein, and splenic vein. Univariate analysis showed that diabetes mellitus, lower levels of hemoglobin, platelet counts, and portal vein flow velocity as well as increased MELD scores, platelet indices, portal vein diameter, and splenic thickness were associated with PVT patients than in non-PVT patients (all P<0.01).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of PVT was 17.9%. PVT occurred mainly in the portal vein trunk, superior mesenteric vein, and splenic vein. Diabetes mellitus, lower levels of hemoglobin, platelet count and portal vein flow velocity as well as increased MELD score, platelet indices, portal vein diameter, and splenic thickening were associated with PVT. Splenic thickening, marked reduced of mean portal flow velocity, and diabetes mellitus may be risk factors for PVT.

Portal vein thrombosis

Portal vein thrombosis is an important cause of portal hypertension. PVT occurs in association with cirrhosis or as a result of malignant invasion by hepatocellular carcinoma or even in the absence of associated liver disease. With the current research into its genesis, majority now have an underlying prothrombotic state detectable. Endothelial activation and stagnant portal blood flow also contribute to formation of the thrombus. Acute non-cirrhotic PVT, chronic PVT (EHPVO), and portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis are the three main variants of portal vein thrombosis with varying etiological factors and variability in presentation and management. Procoagulant state should be actively investigated. Anticoagulation is the mainstay of therapy for acute non-cirrhotic PVT, with supporting evidence for its use in cirrhotic population as well. Chronic PVT (EHPVO) on the other hand requires the management of portal hypertension as such and with role for anticoagulation in the setting of underlying prothrombotic state, however data is awaited in those with no underlying prothrombotic states. TIPS and liver transplant may be feasible even in the setting of PVT however proper selection of candidates and type of surgery is warranted. Thrombolysis and thrombectomy have some role. TARE is a new modality for management of HCC with portal vein invasion.

Causes and consequences of portal vein thrombosis in 1,243 patients with cirrhosis: results of a longitudinal study

In cirrhosis, portal vein thrombosis (PVT) could be a cause or a consequence of the progression of liver disease. We analyzed data from a prospective trial of ultrasound screening for hepatocellular carcinoma in order to identify risk factors for and the impact of PVT in patients with cirrhosis. In all, 1,243 adults with cirrhosis without PVT were enrolled from 43 liver units in France and Belgium between June 2000 and March 2006. The mean follow-up was 47 months. Doppler ultrasonography was used to check the portal vein. Progression of liver disease was defined by the development of: ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, variceal bleeding, prothrombin <45%, serum bilirubin >45 μmol/L, albumin <28 g/L, and/or creatinine >115 μmol/L. G20210A prothrombin and factor V gene mutations were assessed in sera stored at three large centers. The 5-year cumulative incidence of PVT was 10.7%. PVT was mostly partial and varied over time. The development of PVT was independently associated with baseline esophageal varices (P = 0.01) and prothrombin time (P = 0.002), but not with disease progression before PVT, or prothrombotic mutations. Disease progression was independently associated with baseline age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11-2.17), body mass index (HR 1.40; 95% CI: 1.01-1.95), prothrombin time (HR 0.79; 95% CI: 0.70-0.90), serum albumin (HR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.94-0.99), and esophageal varices (HR 1.70; 95% CI: 1.21-2.38) but not with the prior development of PVT (HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.68-2.65).

CONCLUSION

In patients with cirrhosis, the development of PVT is associated with the severity of liver disease at baseline, but does not follow a recent progression of liver disease. There is no evidence that the development of PVT is responsible for further progression of liver disease.

Novel insights into the development of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis patients

The prognostic impact of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in liver cirrhosis remains controversial among studies, primarily because the risk stratification of PVT is often lacking. A definition of clinically significant PVT should be proposed and actively improved. Moreover, the risk factors for the development of PVT in liver cirrhosis should be fully recognized to screen and identify high-risk patients. Currently, well-recognized risk factors include a reduced portal vein flow velocity, a worse liver function, splenectomy, liver transplantation, and factor V Leiden and prothrombin G20210A mutations. Novel risk factors include an increased flow volume of portosystemic collateral vessel, thrombopoietin receptor agnonists, and non-selective beta-blockers. In contrast to the traditional perspectives, the abnormalities of procoagulant and anticoagulant factors may not contribute to the development of PVT in liver cirrhosis. Further studies should explore the role of other risk factors, such as antiphospholipid antibodies, methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T gene mutation, hyperhomocysteinemia, and myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is being increasingly recognized in patients with advanced cirrhosis and in those undergoing liver transplantation. Reduced flow in the portal vein is probably responsible for clotting in the spleno-porto-mesenteric venous system. There is also increasing evidence that hypercoagulability occurs in advanced liver disease and contributes to the risk of PVT. Ultrasound based studies have reported a prevalence of PVT in 10-25% of cirrhotic patients without hepatocellular carcinoma. Partial thrombosis of the portal vein is more common and may not have pathophysiological consequences. However, there is high risk of progression of partial PVT to complete PVT that may cause exacerbation of portal hypertension and progression of liver insufficiency. It is thus, essential to accurately diagnose and stage PVT in patients waiting for transplantation and consider anticoagulation therapy. Therapy with low molecular weight heparin and vitamin K antagonists has been shown to achieve complete and partial recanalization in 33-45% and 15-35% of cases respectively. There are however, no guidelines to help determine the dose and therapeutic efficacy of anticoagulation in patients with cirrhosis. Anticoagulation therapy related bleeding is the most feared complication but it appears that the risk of variceal bleeding is more likely to be dependent on portal pressure rather than solely related to coagulation status. TIPS has also been reported to restore patency of the portal vein. Patients with complete PVT currently do not form an absolute contraindication for liver transplantation. Thrombectomy or thromboendovenectomy is possible in more than 75% of patients followed by anatomical end-to-end portal anastomosis. When patency of the portal vein and/or superior mesenteric vein is not achieved, only non-anatomical techniques (reno-portal anastomosis or cavo-portal hemitransposition) can be performed. These techniques, which do not fully reverse portal hypertension, are associated with higher morbidity and mortality risks in the short term.

Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T gene mutation and hyperhomocysteinemia in Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

AIM

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to explore the role of the methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) C677T gene mutation and hyperhomocysteinemia in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome (BCS) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ScienceDirect databases were searched. Eligible studies should compare the prevalence of the MTHFR C677T mutation or hyperhomocysteinemia or the homocysteine levels between BCS or non-cirrhotic PVT patients and healthy controls or between cirrhotic patients with and without PVT. A pooled odds ratio or weighted mean difference with 95% confidence interval was calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 484 articles retrieved, 20 were included. BCS and non-cirrhotic PVT patients had a higher prevalence of homozygous MTHFR mutation than healthy controls. The difference was statistically significant in BCS patients, but not in non-cirrhotic PVT patients. BCS and non-cirrhotic PVT patients had a significantly higher prevalence of hyperhomocysteinemia and homocysteine level than healthy controls. Cirrhotic patients with PVT had a significantly higher prevalence of homozygous MTHFR mutation than those without PVT. However, the association between homocysteine level and PVT in cirrhotic patients was inconsistent among three studies.

CONCLUSION

Homozygous MTHFR mutation and hyperhomocysteinemia may be associated with the occurrence of BCS and non-cirrhotic PVT. In addition, homozygous MTHFR mutation may increase the risk of PVT in cirrhotic patients. However, the current evidence failed to support the association of hyperhomocysteinemia with PVT in cirrhotic patients.

Associations of coagulation factor V Leiden and prothrombin G20210A mutations with Budd-Chiari syndrome and portal vein thrombosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the associations of the coagulation factor V (encoded by F5) Leiden (FVL) or prothrombin (encoded by F2) G20210A mutation with Budd-Chiari syndrome or portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

METHODS

Relevant articles were identified in searches of the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect databases. The prevalence of the FVL and prothrombin G20210A mutations were compared between patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome or PVT without cirrhosis and healthy individuals (controls) and between patients with cirrhosis, with and without PVT. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

We initially identified 869 articles, and included 27 in our final analysis. Compared with controls, patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome had a significantly higher prevalence of the FVL mutation (OR, 6.21; 95% CI, 3.93-9.79) and a similar prevalence of the prothrombin G20210A mutation (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.69-5.23); patients with PVT without cirrhosis had a significantly higher prevalence of the FVL mutation (OR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.09-3.13) or the prothrombin G20210A mutation (OR, 5.01; 95% CI, 3.03-8.30). Compared with patients with cirrhosis without PVT, patients with cirrhosis and PVT had a significantly higher prevalence of the FVL mutation (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.29-5.07). We observed a trend toward a higher prevalence of the prothrombin G20210A mutation in patients with cirrhosis and PVT, but the difference was not statistically significant (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 0.94-9.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a meta-analysis, the FVL mutation is associated with an increased risk of Budd-Chiari syndrome, PVT without cirrhosis, and PVT in cirrhosis. The prothrombin G20210A mutation is associated with PVT, but not Budd-Chiari syndrome. Studies are needed to confirm these findings in different racial and ethnic groups.

Coagulopathy in liver diseases: complication or therapy?

Coagulopathy in cirrhosis is a composite condition where liver synthetic deficit rebalances coagulation to a parallel reduction of both pro- and anticoagulant factors. Cirrhosis is therefore no longer considered a hypocoagulable state but rather a more unstable hemostatic balance with a lower threshold for tipping toward thrombosis or bleeding. Tendency to bleeding in cirrhosis is due to the reduction in the synthesis of procoagulants and a low platelet count as well as hyperfibrinolysis. Variceal hemorrhage is a frequent bleeding complication in decompensated cirrhosis. However, the possible contribution of coagulopathy as a precipitant or an aggravating factor is poorly documented and further data are required to clarify its real contributing role. Moreover, apart from the gastrointestinal tract, the occurrence of spontaneous and procedure-related bleeding elsewhere in the body, whilst not uncommon, is less than would be expected. By contrast, a large-scale population-based study has shown the propensity towards venous thrombosis in patients with liver diseases. Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a critical but frequent event occurring in up to 40% of patients with liver cirrhosis. PVT causes deterioration of the clinical course, the complications of portal hypertension and an increase in post-transplant mortality. The pathogenesis of PVT includes both local alterations, like blood flow reduction and endothelial activation, and systemic derangement. Systemic prohemostatic alterations include high von Willebrand factor, low ADAMTS-13, low levels of anticoagulants (antithrombin, proteins C and S) and increases in procoagulants like factor VIII. Low-molecular-weight heparin such as enoxaparin has proven to be safe and effective in both the treatment and prevention of PVT. In addition, patients in prophylaxis with enoxaparin showed a lower rate of decompensation and a better survival without bleeding complications. In such patients, circulating bacterial DNA, endotoxemia and markers of inflammation were attenuated compared to controls. These results therefore suggest a possible connection between enoxaparin, decrease of endotoxemia and reduction of portal hypertension. The approach to the coagulopathy in patients with liver diseases is changing: while the main goal for clinicians so far has been to reduce the risk of bleeding, the results of these new studies highlight the importance of preventing or treating thrombophilic disorders like PVT to avoid microcirculatory damage and eventually liver decompensation.

Management of portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a fairly common complication of liver cirrhosis. Importantly, occlusive PVT might influence the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis. Evidence from a randomized controlled trial has shown that anticoagulation can prevent the occurrence of PVT in patients with cirrhosis without prior PVT. Evidence from several case series has also demonstrated that anticoagulation can achieve portal vein recanalization in patients with cirrhosis and PVT. Early initiation of anticoagulation therapy and absence of previous portal hypertensive bleeding might be positively associated with a high rate of portal vein recanalization after anticoagulation. However, the possibility of spontaneous resolution of partial PVT questions the necessity of anticoagulation for the treatment of partial PVT. In addition, a relatively low recanalization rate of complete PVT after anticoagulation therapy suggests its limited usefulness in patients with complete PVT. Successful insertion of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) not only recanalizes the thrombosed portal vein, but also relieves the symptomatic portal hypertension. However, the technical difficulty of TIPS potentially limits its widespread application, and the risk and benefits should be fully balanced. Notably, current recommendations regarding the management of PVT in liver cirrhosis are insufficient owing to low-quality evidence.

Does decreased fibrinolysis have a role to play in the development of non-neoplastic portal vein thrombosis in patients with hepatic cirrhosis?

Hepatic cirrhosis is characterized by complex abnormalities of the fibrinolytic system. Little is known about the possible association between these alterations and thrombosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the fibrinolytic profile in cirrhotic individuals with and without portal vein thrombosis (PVT). We measured thrombin activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (TAFI), total amount of activated TAFI (TAFIa/ai), plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI-1), plasminogen and fibrinogen plasma levels in 66 cirrhotic patients (33 with and 33 without PVT) and in 66 healthy volunteers. TAFI plasma levels (median [range]) were significantly lower in cirrhotic individuals (5.6 μg/ml [1.7-11.7]) than in controls (10.1 μg/ml [6.6-14.2], p < 0.0001), while TAFIa/ai levels were significantly higher in cases (18.3 ng/ml [0.3-35.4]) than in controls (15.9 ng/ml [7.4-41], p = 0.02). Cirrhotic patients with PVT had higher TAFI (6.6 μg/ml [2.9-10.1]), TAFIa/ai (19.2 ng/ml [11.6-35.4]) and PAI-1 (33.1 ng/ml [27.6-56.3]) plasma levels than those without PVT (3.9 μg/ml [1.7-11.7], p = 0.001; 15.6 ng/ml [10.3-33.9], p = 0.037; 15.9 ng/ml [2.5-29.1], p = 0.004. The fibrinolytic profile in cirrhotic individuals with PVT is characterized by higher levels of TAFI, TAFIa/ai and PAI-1 than in those without PVT. These alterations identify a hypofibrinolytic condition that may increase the risk of developing a thrombotic event.

Value of D-dimer and protein S for diagnosis of portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the value of D-dimer and protein S plasma concentrations for diagnosis of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

D-dimer and protein S were quantified, PVT was diagnosed by dynamic enhanced computed tomography and liver function was classified using the Child-Pugh system. Receiver operating curve analysis was performed.

RESULTS

D-dimer increased, and protein S decreased, with decreasing liver function in the total study population (n = 188). D-dimer concentrations were significantly higher and protein S concentrations were significantly lower in patients with (n = 51) than those without PVT (n = 137). D-dimer had high specificity and negative predictive value (NPV) in Child-Pugh class A or B patients (cut-off values>0.56 mg/l and >1.18 mg/l, respectively). In class C patients>0.77 mg/l D-dimer had high sensitivity and NPV. Protein S had high sensitivity but low specificity in class A or B patients (cut-off values < 17.4 mg/l and <19.2 mg/l, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Plasma D-dimer and protein S are potential biomarkers for PVT diagnosis in patients with cirrhosis. PVT can be excluded when D-dimer is low and protein S is elevated.

Management of nonneoplastic portal vein thrombosis in the setting of liver transplantation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Nonneoplastic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is frequent in patients with cirrhosis who undergo liver transplantation (LT); however, data on its impact on outcome and strategies of management are sparse.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed by analyzing studies that report on PVT in LT recipients and were published between January 1986 and January 2012.

RESULTS

Of 25,753 liver transplants, 2004 were performed in patients with PVT (7.78%), and approximately half presented complete thrombosis. Thrombectomy/thromboendovenectomy was employed in 75% of patients; other techniques included venous graft interposition and portocaval hemitransposition. Overall, the presence of PVT significantly increased 30-day (10.5%) and 1-year (18.8%) post-LT mortality when compared to patients without PVT (7.7% and 15.4%, respectively). However, only complete PVT accounted for this increased mortality. Rethrombosis occurred in up to 13% of patients with complete PVT and in whom no preventative strategies were used, and was associated with increased morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

PVT is common in patients with cirrhosis undergoing LT, and it affects survival when it is complete, at least in the short term after transplant. Therefore, screening for this condition is essential, alongside adequate treatment strategies to attempt repermeation of the PV and prevent thrombosis extension.

Anticoagulation for the treatment of thrombotic complications in patients with cirrhosis

Cirrhotic patients can develop thrombotic complications, which in this group of patients occur with a greater frequency than in the general population. Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is the most common thrombotic phenomenon, although deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism can also occur. Risk factors for thrombosis include inherited and acquired deficiency of factors involved in anticoagulation mechanisms, venous stasis of the portal vein owing to architectural derangement of the liver and possibly local factors related to the endothelium. Clinical manifestations of PVT range from asymptomatic disease to a life-threatening complication, and although it is no longer considered an absolute contraindication for liver transplant, its presence may require challenging surgical techniques, which entail greater morbidity. Anticoagulation therapy is henceforth an important strategy to treat cirrhotic patients with PVT, although experience in this group of patients is limited. Vitamin K antagonists and low-molecular-weight heparin have been used successfully, achieving recanalization of the thrombosed vessel in patients with cirrhosis; however, the precise drug regimen management and monitoring has not be fully explored in this group of patients.

Prospective evaluation of anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for the management of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

There is no established management algorithm for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhotic patients. The aim of our study was to prospectively evaluate anticoagulation and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) to treat PVT.

METHODS

Cirrhotics with non-malignant PVT were included. Low weight molecular heparin anticoagulation was considered in all; TIPS was indicated if thrombosis progressed or anticoagulation was contraindicated. Patients who were not anticoagulated nor received TIPS served as controls.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients (of whom 21 controls) were included. PVT was occlusive in 11/35, with extension to the superior mesenteric or splenic vein in 13/35. In the study group 33 patients were anticoagulated, with a recanalization rate of 36% (12/33) compared with 1/21 among controls. A time interval between appearance of thrombosis and anticoagulation < 6 months predicted chance of repermeation. Thrombus progression occurred in 15/21 non anticoagulated patients and in 5/33 anticoagulated patients (P < 0.001). TIPS was placed in six patients. There were five variceal bleedings and two intestinal venous ischaemia episodes in the control group, compared with one variceal bleeding episode in the study group.

CONCLUSIONS

In cirrhotics with PVT, a treatment algorithm using anticoagulation and TIPS achieves a good chance of complete repermeation, reduces portal hypertensive complications, and decreases the rate of thrombosis progression.

Portal vein thrombosis after restorative proctocolectomy for familial adenomatous polyposis and sigmoid cancer

Postoperative portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is rare, but has been described after various open as well as minimal access abdominal operations, especially splenectomy and colorectal surgical procedures. We report the case of a 39-year-old female who underwent restorative proctocolectomy and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis with sigmoid cancer. She presented 14 days later with vague upper abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting and high output stoma. Doppler ultrasonography confirmed PVT and therefore anticoagulant therapy was started. Her condition improved dramatically and she underwent closure of ileostomy after finishing adjuvant chemotherapy. She remained well at 3-year follow-up with good pouch function and no local or distant recurrence. A high index of suspicion is essential for early diagnosis and prompt treatment of postoperative PVT after restorative proctocolectomy. Early anticoagulation is essential to avoid subsequent complications.

Hypercoagulability in cirrhosis: causes and consequences

Decreased levels of most coagulation factors and thrombocytopenia are the main haemostatic abnormalities of cirrhosis. As a consequence, this condition was, until recently, considered as the prototype acquired coagulopathy responsible for bleeding. However, recent evidence suggests that it should, rather, be regarded as a condition associated with normal or even increased thrombin generation. The bleeding events that occur in these patients should, therefore, be explained by the superimposed conditions that frequently occur in this setting. Due to elevated levels of factor VIII (procoagulant driver) in combination with decreased protein C (anticoagulant driver), which are typically found in patients with cirrhosis, a procoagulant imbalance, defined as a partial resistance to the in vitro anticoagulant action of thrombomodulin, can be demonstrated. Whether this in vitro hypercoagulability is truly representative of what occurs in vivo remains to be established. However, the hypothesis that it may have clinical consequences is attractive and deserves attention. The possible consequences that we discuss herein include whether (i) cirrhosis is a condition associated with increased risk of venous thromboembolism or portal vein thrombosis; (ii) the hypercoagulability associated with cirrhosis has any other role outside coagulation (i.e. progression of liver fibrosis); and (iii) anticoagulation should be used in cirrhosis. Although apparently provocative, considering anticoagulation as a therapeutic option in patients with cirrhosis is now supported by a rationale of increasing strength. There may be subgroups of patients who benefit from anticoagulation to treat or prevent thrombosis and to slow hepatic fibrosis. Clinical studies are warranted to explore these therapeutic options.

The epidemiology and clinical features of portal vein thrombosis: a multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Reliable epidemiological data for portal vein thrombosis are lacking.

AIMS

To investigate the incidence, prevalence and survival rates for patients with portal vein thrombosis.

METHODS

Retrospective multicentre study of all patients registered with the diagnosis of portal vein thrombosis between 1995 and 2004.

RESULTS

A total of 173 patients (median age 57 years, 93 men) with portal vein thrombosis were identified and followed up for a median of 2.5 years (range 0-9.7). The mean age-standardized incidence and prevalence rates were 0.7 per 100,000 per year and 3.7 per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively. Liver disease was present in 70 patients (40%), malignancy in 27%, thrombophilic factors in 22% and myeloproliferative disorders in 11%. Two or more risk factors were identified in 80 patients (46%). At diagnosis, 65% were put on anticoagulant therapy. Thrombolysis, TIPS, surgical shunting and liver transplantation were performed in 6, 3, 2 and 8 patients, respectively. The overall survival at 1 year and 5 years was 69% and 54%. In the absence of malignancy and cirrhosis, the survival was 92% and 76%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence and prevalence rates of portal vein thrombosis were 0.7 per 100,000 inhabitants per year and 3.7 per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively. Concurrent prothrombotic risk factors are common. The prognosis is variable and highly dependent on underlying disease.