Portal Vein Thrombosis Is a Risk Factor for Poor Early Outcomes After Liver Transplantation: Analysis of Risk Factors and Outcomes for Portal Vein Thrombosis in Waitlisted Patients. Transplantation. 2016;100:126-133. [PMID: 26050013 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000000785]

Management of Portal vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is one of the common complications of cirrhosis. The incidence of PVT correlates with liver disease severity-higher incidence in patients with Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) C, large spontaneous portosystemic shunts, hepatofugal portal flow, and in the presence of hepatocellular carcinoma. PVT may worsen ascites, increase the risk and poor control of variceal bleeding. The occurrence of PVT may increase morbidity and lower survival after a liver transplant. Using statins prevents the occurrence of PVT, whereas beta-blockers may aggravate its occurrence. Cross-sectional imaging is mandatory for the precise diagnosis and classification of PVT. Symptomatic, occlusive PVT and candidacy for liver transplantation are the main indications for anticoagulation. Vitamin K antagonists, low-molecular-weight heparin, and newer anticoagulants are effective and safe in cirrhosis. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants are agents of choice in early cirrhosis (CTP A, B). The duration of anticoagulant therapy, predictors of response, and management of complications of cirrhosis while on therapy require in-depth knowledge and individualized treatment. Transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunt can be considered in nonresponsive cases or when anticoagulants are contraindicated. This manuscript reviews the latest updated knowledge about managing PVT in cirrhosis.

Unique multidisciplinary approach in living donor liver transplantation to achieve total physiological revascularization in a patient with complete occlusion of portal vein system with combined chronic and subacute thrombosis

Patients receiving liver transplantation in a setting of complete portal vein (PV) and superior mesenteric vein (SMV) thrombosis (Yerdel grade 4) experience lower outcomes after surgery; prognosis is independently influenced by the portal flow reconstruction technique, showing better outcomes in physiological surgical strategies. We describe a case of living donor liver transplantation in which the patient could not receive common physiological reconstructions preoperatively due to multiple small collaterals and extensive thrombosis down to first branches of SMV. We performed thromboendovenectomy of the PV and SMV first, but acute thrombosis developed recurrently even with interposition venous homograft between pericholedochal collateral vein and proximal recipient PV. Immediate after surgery, an intervention radiologist performed stent insertion into 3 stenotic points. Through multidisciplinary approach, complete physiological recanalization was obtained with normal liver function.

Portal vein thrombosis: diagnosis, management, and endpoints for future clinical studies

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) refers to the development of a non-malignant obstruction of the portal vein, its branches, its radicles, or a combination. This Review first provides a comprehensive overview of all aspects of PVT, namely the specifics of the portal venous system, the risk factors for PVT, the pathophysiology of portal hypertension in PVT, the interest in non-invasive tests, as well as therapeutic approaches including the effect of treating risk factors for PVT or cause of cirrhosis, anticoagulation, portal vein recanalisation by interventional radiology, and prevention and management of variceal bleeding in patients with PVT. Specific issues are also addressed including portal cholangiopathy, mesenteric ischaemia and intestinal necrosis, quality of life, fertility, contraception and pregnancy, and PVT in children. This Review will then present endpoints for future clinical studies in PVT, both in patients with and without cirrhosis, agreed by a large panel of experts through a Delphi consensus process. These endpoints include classification of portal vein thrombus extension, classification of PVT evolution, timing of assessment of PVT, and global endpoints for studies on PVT including clinical outcomes. These endpoints will help homogenise studies on PVT and thus facilitate reporting, comparison between studies, and validation of future studies and trials on PVT.

Early Graft Failure After Living-Donor Liver Transplant

BACKGROUND

Living-donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has been increasing in the USA. While data exist on longer-term patient and graft outcomes, a contemporary analysis of short-term outcomes is needed.

AIM

Evaluate short-term (30-day) graft failure rates and identify predictors associated with these outcomes.

METHODS

Adult (≥ 18) LDLT recipients from 01/2004 to 12/2021 were analyzed from the United States Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Graft status at 30 days was assessed with graft failure defined as retransplantation or death. Comparison of continuous and categorical variables was performed and a multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors of early graft failure.

RESULTS

During the study period, 4544 LDLTs were performed with a graft failure rate of 3.4% (155) at 30 days. Grafts from male donors (aOR: 0.63, CI 0.44-0.89), right lobe grafts (aOR: 0.40, CI 0.27-0.61), recipients aged > 60 years (aOR: 0.52, CI 0.32-0.86), and higher recipient albumin (aOR: 0.73, CI 0.57-0.93) were associated with superior early graft outcomes, whereas Asian recipient race (vs. White; aOR: 3.75, CI 1.98-7.10) and a history of recipient PVT (aOR: 2.7, CI 1.52-4.78) were associated with inferior outcomes. LDLTs performed during the most recent 2016-2021 period (compared to 2004-2009 and 2010-2015) resulted in significantly superior outcomes (aOR: 0.45, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that while short-term adult LDLT graft failure is uncommon, there are opportunities for optimizing outcomes by prioritizing right lobe donation, improving candidate nutritional status, and careful pre-transplant risk assessment of candidates with known PVT. Notably, a period effect exists whereby increased LDLT experience in the most recent era correlated with improved outcomes.

Preventing variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Preventing rebleeding is crucial, but the best prevention technique for patients with cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) remains debatable. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis compared a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) with endoscopic therapy (ET) plus nonselective beta-blockers (NSBBs) for preventing variceal rebleeding in this patient population.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched from their inception until May 18, 2023. The studies were screened using predetermined criteria, relevant data were extracted, and pooled analyses were performed using the Reviewer Manager 5.4.1 software.

RESULTS

We retrieved 1032 studies, of which 5 studies comprising a total of 272 patients were included. The postoperative variceal rebleeding rate was significantly lower in the TIPS group than in the ET + NSBBs group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.11-0.35, P < 0.05, I2 = 0%), but the portal vein recanalization rate was higher (OR = 7.92, 95% CI = 3.04-20.67, P < 0.05, I2 = 0%). The rates of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) and mortality did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that TIPS prevents variceal rebleeding without increasing the hepatic encephalopathy risk more effectively than ET plus NSBBs, but this benefit did not translate into improved survival. Thus, it may be preferable to ET plus NSBBs for preventing variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and PVT. However, more large-scale and multicenter randomized controlled trials involving other patient populations are required to verify the clinical efficacy of both these treatments and ensure generalizability.

Management of Nonmalignant Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

Nonmalignant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of cirrhosis especially at the stage of decompensations. The diagnosis of PVT in cirrhosis is often incidental and it may be detected during routine semestral abdominal ultrasound with Doppler during screening for hepatocellular carcinoma or during hospitalization for decompensated cirrhosis. After detection of PVT on abdominal ultrasound, it is important to evaluate patients with cross-sectional imaging to determine the age of thrombus, whether acute or chronic, the extent and degree of luminal occlusion of the portal vein, and to rule out hepatocellular carcinoma or other underlying malignancy. Factors influencing management include the degree and extent of luminal occlusion of PVT, potential listing for liver transplantation, and portal hypertension (PHT) complications such as variceal hemorrhage and refractory ascites, severity of thrombocytopenia, and other comorbidities including chronic kidney disease. Anticoagulation is the most common therapeutic option and it is specially indicated in patients who are candidates for liver transplantation. Interventional procedures including transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement and mechanical thrombectomy may be used on a case-by-case basis in patients with contraindications or adverse events related to anticoagulation, who develop worsening PVT while on anticoagulant therapy, or have chronic PVT and PHT complications that are not manageable medically or endoscopically.

Portal Vein Thrombosis: State-of-the-Art Review

Background: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a rare disease with an estimated incidence of 2 to 4 cases per 100,000 inhabitants. The most common predisposing conditions for PVT are chronic liver diseases (cirrhosis), primary or secondary hepatobiliary malignancy, major infectious or inflammatory abdominal disease, or myeloproliferative disorders. Methods: PVT can be classified on the basis of the anatomical site, the degree of venous occlusion, and the timing and type of presentation. The main differential diagnosis of PVT, both acute and chronic, is malignant portal vein invasion, most frequently by hepatocarcinoma, or constriction (typically by pancreatic cancer or cholangiocarcinoma). Results: The management of PVT is based on anticoagulation and the treatment of predisposing conditions. The aim of anticoagulation in acute thrombosis is to prevent the extension of the clot and enable the recanalization of the vein to avoid the development of complications, such as intestinal infarction and portal hypertension. Conclusions: The treatment with anticoagulant therapy favors the reduction of portal hypertension, and this allows for a decrease in the risk of bleeding, especially in patients with esophageal varices. The anticoagulant treatment is generally recommended for at least three to six months. Prosecution of anticoagulation is advised until recanalization or lifelong if the patient has an underlying permanent pro-coagulant condition that cannot be corrected or if there is thrombosis extending to the mesenteric veins.

Left Gastric Vein Direct Anastomosis as Alternative to Portal Flow Reconstruction in Liver Transplantation

Introduction

The most relevant limiting factor for performing end-to-end anastomosis is portal vein thrombosis (PVT), which leads to challenging vascular reconstructions. This study aimed to analyze a single center's experience using the left gastric vein (LGV) for portal flow reconstruction in liver transplantation (LT).

Methods

This retrospective observational study reviewed laboratory and imaging tests, a description of the surgical technique, and outpatient follow-up of patients with portal system thrombosis undergoing LT with portal flow reconstruction using the LGV. This study was conducted at a single transplant reference center in the northeast region of Brazil from January 2016 to December 2021.

Results

Between January 2016 and December 2021, 848 transplants were performed at our center. Eighty-two patients (9.7%) presented with PVT, most of whom were treated with thrombectomy. Nine patients (1.1% with PVT) had extensive thrombosis of the portal system (Yerdel III or IV), which required end-to-side anastomosis between the portal vein and the LGV without graft, and had no intraoperative complications. All patients had successful portal flow in Doppler ultrasound control evaluations.

Discussion

The goal was to reestablish physiological flow to the graft. A surgical strategy includes using the LGV graft. According to our reports, using LGV fulfilled the requirements for excellent vascular anastomosis and even allowed the dispensing of venous grafts. This is the largest case series in a single center of reconstruction of portal flow with direct anastomosis with the LGV without needing a vascular graft.

Prevalence of portal vein thrombosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a meta-analysis of observational studies

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of cirrhosis as a result of portal hypertension and modification in the hemostatic balance. Accumulating evidence now suggests that patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), especially those with advanced forms, have an increased risk of PVT. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to estimate the overall prevalence of PVT in patients with NAFLD and its advanced forms compared with patients with advanced liver diseases from other etiologies. We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases from the inception date to December 30th 2022, using predefined keywords, to identify observational studies. Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects modeling. We included five observational studies for a total of 225,571 patients. Of these, 26,840 (11.9%) patients had NAFLD, whereas the PVT prevalence was 8.5% (n = 2,280). When compared with patients with advanced liver diseases from other etiologies, patients with NAFLD and its advanced forms had a higher risk of prevalent PVT (OR 1.34, 100% CI 1.07-1.67 p < 0,01). The between-study heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 88%). This meta-analysis suggests that compared with patients with advanced liver diseases from other etiologies, patient with NAFLD and its advanced forms had a higher risk of prevalent PVT. Further research is required to understand the complex link between NAFLD/NASH and PVT development.

Resection Versus Transplant for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: How to Offer the Best Modality

Liver resection and liver transplantation are the mainstay of treatment for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Patient comorbidities, tumor resectability, and perioperative morbidity and mortality risk, specifically of post-hepatectomy liver failure, are determining factors when deciding between liver resection and liver transplantation in patients who do not have an obvious contraindication to either treatment. Liver resection is preferred in patients without cirrhosis, and it may be a reasonable choice in patient with cirrhosis but preserved liver function and no portal hypertension if the size and function of the future liver remnant are appropriate, especially if organ availability is scarce.

Role of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Liver Transplant Setting

Liver transplantation is currently the only curative therapy for patients with liver cirrhosis. Not all patients in the natural course of the disease will undergo transplantation, but the majority of them will experience portal hypertension and its complications. In addition to medical and endoscopic therapy, a key role in managing these complications is played by the placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Some indications for TIPS placement are well-established, and they are expanding and broadening over time. This review aims to describe the role of TIPS in managing patients with liver cirrhosis, in light of liver transplantation. As far as it is known, TIPS placement seems not to affect the surgical aspects of liver transplantation, in terms of intraoperative bleeding rates, postoperative complications, or length of stay in the Intensive Care Unit. However, the placement of a TIPS "towards transplant" can offer advantages in terms of ameliorating a patient's clinical condition at the time of transplantation and improving patient survival. Additionally, the TIPS procedure can help preserve the technical feasibility of the transplant itself. In this context, indications for TIPS placement at an earlier stage are drawing particular attention. However, TIPS insertion in decompensated patients can also lead to serious adverse events. For these reasons, further studies are needed to make reliable recommendations for TIPS in the pre-transplant setting.

New Indications for TIPSs: What Do We Know So Far?

Since 1988, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been an effective therapy for portal hypertension in many settings. Thanks to continuous technical improvements and a wiser selection of patients, excellent results have been achieved with this therapeutic strategy. The historical indications for TIPS placement, in the context of liver cirrhosis, such as refractory ascites and variceal bleeding are now well established and known. However, in recent years, new indications are emerging. These have been investigated and approved in some studies but are not yet included in guidelines and clinical practice. This review aims to highlight what is new for the role of TIPS in portal vein thrombosis (especially in patients awaiting liver transplantation), in recurrent ascites and not only refractory ascites, as a neoadjuvant therapy before abdominal surgery and, finally, in the setting of noncirrhotic portal hypertension. All these new aspects are addressed in this review with a critical approach based on the literature revision and clinical practice. Future research is needed to explore and validate the new role of TIPS in these scenarios.

Portal Vein Pull-Through Technique and Thrombectomy for Extensive Portal Vein Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Herein, a different technique is presented describing complete dissection of the entire portal vein (PV), superior mesenteric vein (SMV), and splenic vein, thus enabling a complete thrombectomy without the risk of uncontrolled hemorrhage due to blind thrombectomy.

METHODS

In cases where a thrombectomy would not be an option because of extensive thrombosis involving the confluence of the PV and SMV, small branches of the SMV, including the inferior mesenteric vein, were divided. Both the SMV and splenic vein were encircled separately. Then, the side branches of the PV above the pancreas, left gastric vein on the left side, and superior pancreatoduodenal vein on the right side were divided. The lateral and posterior part of the PV were dissected within the pancreas both from above and below, allowing the main PV completely free from attachments. At this point, the splenic vein and SMV were clamped, and the main PV was divided above the pancreas and then pulled back through the pancreatic tunnel. The thrombus was easily dissected of the vein under direct visualization, and afterward the PV was redirected to its original position. Then, the liver transplant was carried out in a regular fashion.

RESULTS

This technique was applied to 2 patients. The first was a 43-year-old man who underwent a right lobe living donor liver transplant because of hepatitis B virus-related cirrhosis. The patient is still alive and well with stable liver function after 15 years of follow-up. The second was a 69-year-old woman who underwent a right lobe living donor liver transplant because of hepatitis C virus and hepatocellular carcinoma. She survived the procedure and her liver function was entirely normal afterward. She died of pneumonia and sepsis 5 months after transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

This technique enables complete dissection of the entire PV, SMV, and splenic vein. Thus, complete thrombectomy under direct visualization without the risk of uncontrolled hemorrhage can be performed.

Technical Feasibility of Suction Thrombectomy Using a Large-Bore Aspiration System in the Portomesenteric Venous System

PURPOSE

To assess technical feasibility and safety of portal vein thrombectomy with suction thrombectomy using a large-bore thrombectomy device for portomesenteric venous thrombosis (PMVT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After receiving approval from institutional review board, patients undergoing PMVT treatment using a large-bore aspiration thrombectomy device (Inari FlowTriever or ClotTriever) between July 2019 and June 2021 were identified at 2 medical centers. Charts were reviewed for demographic information, imaging findings, and procedural details. PMVT was categorized using the Yerdel grading system. The thrombectomy procedure was performed via transjugular access through the existing or a new transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) or transsplenic or transhepatic approach. Technical success was defined as successful clot reduction and restoration of portal venous flow at the conclusion of the procedure. Patient outcomes based on clinical presentation, adverse events, and thrombectomy-associated adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty patients, with a median age of 58 years (range, 23-72 years), underwent large-bore aspiration thrombectomy, which was technically successful in 19 of 20 (95%) patients. In 9 of 20 (45%) patients, 9 of 20 (45%) patients, and 2 of 20 (10%) patients, the 20-F, 16-F, and 24-F devices were used, respectively. Fourteen patients had a pre-existing TIPS, and 6 patients had a TIPS created. In 5 of 20 (25%) patients, overnight lysis was performed in conjunction with Inari thrombectomy. Thrombus resolution with restoration of flow was achieved in 19 of 20 (95%) cases. There were no thrombectomy-associated adverse events. The mean follow-up time was 70 days (±113) at which time primary patency of the portal venous system was present in 16 of 20 (80%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Large-bore aspiration portal vein thrombectomy is feasible for PMVT.

A novel potential mechanism for the development of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis based on portal hemodynamics

BACKGROUND

Marked changes in hemodynamics have been suggested to be a potential contributing factor to portal vein thrombosis (PVT) development. This study investigated the effect of portal hemodynamics based on the anatomical structure of the portal venous system on PVT development.

METHODS

The morphological features of portal venous system in patients with PVT and those without PVT subgroups were compared. In addition, idealized PV models were established to numerically evaluate the effect of the variation in the angulation of superior mesenteric vein (SMV) and splenic vein (SV) on the hemodynamics of portal venous system.

RESULTS

The angle α (angulation of SMV and SV) in patients with PVT was lower than that in patients without PVT (p < 0.0001), which was the only independent risk factor (odds ratio (OR), 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.95); p < 0.0001) for the presence of PVT. With the change in angle α, the flow pattern of blood flow changed greatly, especially the helical flow. When α = 80°, helical flow only appeared at the local PV near the intersection of SMV and SV. When α = 120°, most regions were occupied by the helical flow. In addition, the h₂ gradually increased with increasing α, when α = 80°, h₂ = 12.6 m/s²; when α = 120°, h₂ = 29.3 m/s².

CONCLUSIONS

The angulation of SV and SMV was closely associated with PVT development. Helical flow changed following the varying angulation of SV and SMV. Therefore, angulation of SV and SMV may help to identify high-risk cohorts for future PVT development earlier.

Comparison of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic with endoscopic treatment plus anticoagulation for esophageal variceal bleeding and portal vein thrombosis in liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The optimal management of esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) and portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in liver cirrhosis has not been well-established. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and endoscopic treatment (ET) plus anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with EVB and PVT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 66 cirrhotic patients with PVT and EVB (31 in the TIPS group and 35 in the ET plus anticoagulation group) were evaluated retrospectively between January 2016 and January 2022.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period, 85.5% of patients in the TIPS group achieved complete recanalization of the portal vein, as compared with 19.6% in the ET plus anticoagulation group (p < .001). The cumulative 5-year rate of variceal rebleeding in the TIPS group was significantly lower than that in the ET plus anticoagulation group (31.0 vs. 50.1%; p = .017). The TIPS group exhibited a significantly higher incidence of overt hepatic encephalopathy (HE) than the ET plus anticoagulation group (25.8 vs. 5.7%; p = .037). No difference in the 5-year survival rate (74.1 vs. 85.7%; p = .692) and probability of other complications was observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

TIPS was superior to ET plus anticoagulation in preventing variceal rebleeding and achieving recanalization of PVT but increased the incidence of overt HE without improving the survival rate.

Novel Benchmark Values for Redo Liver Transplantation: Does the Outcome Justify the Effort?

OBJECTIVE

To define benchmark cutoffs for redo liver transplantation (redo-LT).

BACKGROUND

In the era of organ shortage, redo-LT is frequently discussed in terms of expected poor outcome and wasteful resources. However, there is a lack of benchmark data to reliably evaluate outcomes after redo-LT.

METHODS

We collected data on redo-LT between January 2010 and December 2018 from 22 high-volume transplant centers. Benchmark cases were defined as recipients with model of end stage liver disease (MELD) score ≤25, absence of portal vein thrombosis, no mechanical ventilation at the time of surgery, receiving a graft from a donor after brain death. Also, high-urgent priority and early redo-LT including those for primary nonfunction (PNF) or hepatic artery thrombosis were excluded. Benchmark cutoffs were derived from the 75th percentile of the medians of all benchmark centers.

RESULTS

Of 1110 redo-LT, 373 (34%) cases qualified as benchmark cases. Among these cases, the rate of postoperative complications until discharge was 76%, and increased up to 87% at 1-year, respectively. One-year overall survival rate was excellent with 90%. Benchmark cutoffs included Comprehensive Complication Index CCI ® at 1-year of ≤72, and in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates of ≤13% and ≤15%, respectively. In contrast, patients who received a redo-LT for PNF showed worse outcomes with some values dramatically outside the redo-LT benchmarks.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that redo-LT achieves good outcome when looking at benchmark scenarios. However, this figure changes in high-risk redo-LT, as for example in PNF. This analysis objectifies for the first-time results and efforts for redo-LT and can serve as a basis for discussion about the use of scarce resources.

Clinical and imaging predictors of the natural course of bland portal vein thrombus in cirrhotic patients

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombus (PVT) in cirrhotic patients is associated with worsening portal hypertension, leads to increased complexity of necessary interventions such as transjugular liver portosystemic shunt or liver transplantation, and is associated with worse outcomes after liver transplantation. Additionally, there are no established consensus guidelines for management of bland PVT in cirrhotic patients, which currently exists on a spectrum and is patient and provider dependent.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine whether there are associations between key clinical and imaging variables and bland PVT burden over time.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This exploratory, retrospective, single-center study included patients who underwent two or more multiphase CT or MRI examinations between 1/1/2013 and 12/31/2019 and had a diagnosis of PVT. Three readers independently evaluated all index and follow-up examinations for PVT burden using a proposed 8-point scale and the established Yerdel score. Key clinical factors were collected from the electronic medical record. The PVT burden over time and the association of this burden with key clinical and imaging variables were assessed using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

138 patients with cirrhosis and bland PVT were included in the analyses. Median age was 60 years (interquartile range 55-67; 90 men) and median follow-up time was 19.6 months. At baseline, the mean score was 2.31 (± 1.44) and at the final follow-up examination, the mean score was 2.52 (± 1.99). Baseline occlusion level was the only statistically significant association with worsening PVT burden in all four vascular territories (p-value < 0.0001). Anticoagulation status did not have a statistically significant association with change in thrombus burden in any vascular territory or cumulative thrombus burden across all territories (p-value 0.11-0.43).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our study shows that in cirrhotic patients with bland PVT, the thrombus burden did not change significantly over time and baseline thrombus burden is the only clinical factor significantly associated with increasing burden over time.

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.

Reconstructing the portal vein through a posterior pancreatic tunnel: New choice for portal vein thrombosis during liver transplantation

BACKGROUND

Thrombectomy and anatomical anastomosis (TAA) has long been considered the optimal approach to portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in liver transplantation (LT). However, TAA and the current approach for non-physiological portal reconstructions are associated with a higher rate of complications and mortality in some cases.

AIM

To describe a new choice for reconstructing the portal vein through a posterior pancreatic tunnel (RPVPPT) to address cases of unresectable PVT.

METHODS

Between August 2019 and August 2021, 245 adult LTs were performed. Forty-five (18.4%) patients were confirmed to have PVT before surgery, among which seven underwent PV reconstruction via the RPVPPT approach. We retrospectively analyzed the surgical procedure and postoperative complications of these seven recipients that underwent PV reconstruction due to PVT.

RESULTS

During the procedure, PVT was found in all the seven cases with significant adhesion to the vascular wall and could not be dissected. The portal vein proximal to the superior mesenteric vein was damaged in one case when attempting thrombolectomy, resulting in massive bleeding. LT was successfully performed in all patients with a mean duration of 585 min (range 491-756 min) and mean intraoperative blood loss of 800 mL (range 500-3000 mL). Postoperative complications consisted of chylous leakage (n = 3), insufficient portal venous flow to the graft (n = 1), intra-abdominal hemorrhage (n = 1), pulmonary infection (n = 1), and perioperative death (n = 1). The remaining six patients survived at 12-17 mo follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The RPVPPT technique might be a safe and effective surgical procedure during LT for complex PVT. However, follow-up studies with large samples are still warranted due to the relatively small number of cases.

Outcomes of Surgical Strategies for Living Donor Liver Transplantation in Patients With Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Adequate portal flow to the liver graft is the requirement of a successful liver transplant (LT). Historically, portal vein thrombosis (PVT) was a contraindication for LT, especially for living donor LT (LDLT), demanding technically more difficult operations and advanced technique. In this study, the outcomes of patients with and without PVT after LDLT were compared.

METHODS

Adult LDLTs performed by 2 centers (n = 335) between 2013 and 2020 were included into this large cohort study. PVT was classified based on Yerdel classification grade 1 to 4.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients with PVT constituted 19% of the study cohort of 335 recipients. While mean platelet count was found to be lower (P = .011) in the PVT group, patient age (P = .035), operation duration (P = .001), and amount of intraoperative blood transfusion (P = .010) were found to be higher. Incidence of PVT was higher in female patients than males (22.7% vs 16.1%, P = .037). There was no significant difference in survival between patients with and without PVT on 30-day (P = .285), 90-day (P = .565), 1-year (P = .777), and overall survival (P = .917). Early thrombosis did not show a better survival rate than Grades 2, 3, or 4 PVT. Thrombosis limited to portal vein was not found to bring a survival advantage compared with Grade 3 and 4 thromboses. Eversion thrombectomy was the most common procedure (66%) to overcome PVT intraoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Although technically more challenging, PVT is not a contraindication of LDLT. Similar outcomes can be achieved in LDLT in patients with PVT after proper restoration of portal flow, which eliminates the default survival disadvantage of patients with PVT.

Pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease patients-pathogenesis, risk factors, and implications on management

Along with the worldwide increase in obesity and metabolic syndrome, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and its more severe subset, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), are on path to become the leading cause of liver transplantation in the United States. NAFLD, as well as obesity, create an inflammatory milieu via the release of adipocytokines. In turn, the inflammatory environment can trigger an increase in prothrombotic factors. Independent of inflammation, the severity of NASH is associated with a graded increase in hypercoagulability such as an increase in factor VIII, increase in plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, and decrease in protein C. Ultimately, this environment creates an increase in thrombotic risk, leading to higher rates of pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with NASH cirrhosis vesus other causes of cirrhosis. Many studies have shown worse outcomes in liver transplant recipients with PVT as it complicates anastomotic reconstruction which can negatively affect portal blood supply needed for adequate liver functioning. Management and treatment of PVT is not standardized, but from a pharmacologic standpoint, multiple classes of anticoagulants have shown to be successful in recanalization of the portal vein and preventing recurrence of clot with minimal bleeding complications. The increasing prevalence of NASH cirrhosis and subsequent increase in PVT require further research for improved outcomes.

Anticoagulation in Cirrhosis: Evidence for the Treatment of Portal Vein Thrombosis and Applications for Prophylactic Therapy

The clinical utility of anticoagulation for patients with cirrhosis and asymptomatic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is widely debated. Complex hemostatic derangements in cirrhosis that increase risk of both bleeding and thrombosis, as well as a lack of randomized controlled data, limit conclusive assessments regarding optimal management of anticoagulation in this setting. In this review, we summarize the relevant literature pertaining to PVT in cirrhosis, including the effect of untreated PVT on the natural progression of liver disease and the overall impact of anticoagulation on clot burden and other relevant clinical outcomes. Apart from patients who are symptomatic or listed for liver transplantation, data supporting anticoagulation for the treatment of PVT is limited and without clear consensus guidelines. In patients with cirrhosis without PVT, emerging evidence for the role of prophylactic anticoagulation to mitigate the progression of fibrosis suggests an optimal risk-benefit tradeoff with decreased rates of liver decompensation and mortality, without a heightened risk of bleeding. In summation, as our understanding of the role of both prophylactic and therapeutic anticoagulation in cirrhosis continues to evolve, ongoing risk stratification of patients with asymptomatic PVT demands further attention.

Outcome of living donor liver transplantation in patients with preoperative portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer an absolute contraindication for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT). This study aimed to assess the short-term outcomes of LDLT and compare the 1-year survival rates between patients with and without preoperative PVT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This combined prospective and retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent LDLT at Ain Shams Centre for Organ Transplantation (ASCOT) between 2008 and 2020. The study included 60 patients with PVT and 60 patients without PVT. The two groups were compared in terms of preoperative data, operative details, postoperative complications, and 1-year survival.

RESULTS

Most patients with PVT were Child C (65%) and had higher model for end stage liver disease scores (16.23 ± 4.03) compared to the non-PVT group (13.9 ± 4.5). The PVT group showed longer cold ischemic time (CIT), hospital stay, and intensive care unit stay and significantly shorter 1-year survival rate (63.3%) compared to the non-PVT group (86.7%) (P = 0.003). Those with PVT grades I, II, and III had 1-year survival rates of 72.5%, 50%, and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative PVT reduces the 1-year survival after transplantation, with patients with higher PVT grades exhibiting lower 1-year survival. LDLT for PVT still remains challenging and requires further studies.

Consensus Statement on Hemostatic Management, Anticoagulation, and Antiplatelet Therapy in Liver Transplantation

Anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies are increasingly used in liver transplant (LT) candidates and recipients due to cardiovascular comorbidities, portal vein thrombosis, or to manage posttransplant complications. The implementation of the new direct-acting oral anticoagulants and the recently developed antiplatelet drugs is a great challenge for transplant teams worldwide, as their activity must be monitored and their complications managed, in the absence of robust scientific evidence. In this changing and clinically heterogeneous scenario, the Spanish Society of Liver Transplantation and the Spanish Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis aimed to achieve consensus regarding the indications, drugs, dosing, and timing of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapies initiated from the inclusion of the patient on the waiting list to post-LT surveillance. A multidisciplinary group of experts composed by transplant hepatologists, surgeons, hematologists, transplant-specialized anesthesiologists, and intensivists performed a comprehensive review of the literature and identified 21 clinically relevant questions using the patient-intervention-comparison-outcome format. A preliminary list of recommendations was drafted and further validated using a modified Delphi approach by a panel of 24 transplant delegates, each representing a LT institution in Spain. The present consensus statement contains the key recommendations together with the core supporting scientific evidence, which will provide guidance for improved and more homogeneous clinical decision making.

Risk Factors for Posttransplantation Mortality in Recipients With Grade 3 Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure: Analysis of a North American Consortium

Although liver transplantation (LT) yields survival benefit for patients with acute-on-chronic liver failure grade 3 (ACLF-3), knowledge gaps remain regarding risk factors for post-LT mortality. We retrospectively reviewed data from 10 centers in the United States and Canada for patients transplanted between 2018 and 2019 and who required care in the intensive care unit prior to LT. ACLF was identified using the European Association for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure (EASL-CLIF) criteria. A total of 318 patients were studied, of whom 106 (33.3%) had no ACLF, 61 (19.1%) had ACLF-1, 74 (23.2%) had ACLF-2, and 77 (24.2%) had ACLF-3 at transplantation. Survival probability 1 year after LT was significantly higher in patients without ACLF (94.3%) compared with patients with ACLF (87.3%; P = 0.02), but similar between ACLF-1 (88.5%), ACLF-2 (87.8%), and ACLF-3 (85.7%; P = 0.26). Recipients with ACLF-3 and circulatory failure (n = 29) had similar 1-year post-LT survival (82.3%) compared with patients with ACLF-3 without circulatory failure (89.6%; P = 0.32), including those requiring multiple vasopressors. For patients transplanted with ACLF-3 including respiratory failure (n = 20), there was a trend toward significantly lower post-LT survival (P =  0.07) among those with respiratory failure (74.1%) compared with those without (91.0%). The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) at LT for patients with ACLF-3 (n = 15), however, yielded significantly lower survival (91.9% versus 57.1%; P < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that PVT was significantly associated with post-LT mortality within 1 year (odds ratio, 7.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-28.3). No correlation was found between survival after LT and the location or extent of PVT, presence of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, or anticoagulation. LT in patients with ACLF-3 requiring vasopressors yields excellent 1-year survival. LT should be approached cautiously among candidates with ACLF-3 and PVT.

Heparins for prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in cirrhosis: Research advances

Current evidence suggests that liver cirrhosis may increase the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). In cirrhosis, common types of VTE include portal vein thrombosis (PVT), deep vein thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism (PE). Heparins are the most commonly prescribed anticoagulants for the prevention and treatment of VTE. However, the indications, choice, dosage, and monitoring of heparins in cirrhosis remain inconclusive. This paper aims to review the advances in the research of heparins for the prevention and treatment of VTE in cirrhosis to optimize the treatment strategy.

Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis

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

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.

Physiological reno-portal bypass in liver transplantation with non-tumorous portal vein thrombosis

Reno-portal anastomosis (RPA) in presence of spleno-renal shunts (SRS) is a physiological option to restore blood flow in liver transplantation with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). Diffuse splanchnic venous system thrombosis (complex PVT) is its main indication but RPA proved to be useful in selected cases of less extensive thrombosis (non-complex PVT). Up until now only two monocentric and one multicentric case series has been published on this topic in addition to few anecdotal reports. After 2014, we introduced RPA in our institution to manage some cases of complex PVT in presence of SRS. Here, we present the evolution of indication to RPA. From 2014 to 2020, we performed ten RPA: nine patients presented non-complex and one complex PVT. Overall early and late complication rates were 66.6% and 50%, respectively. Two patients developed RPA stenosis, treated by interventional radiology. Self-resolving acute kidney injury (AKI) was observed in three cases. No re-transplantation was necessary. RPA was patent in all patients, with a mean follow-up of 41.9 months. The overall patient survival was 70% at 1 year and 60% at 3 and 5 years. Four patients died at 1, 2, 3 and 20 months from LT. Causes of deaths were, respectively, stroke, cerebral infection, sepsis (MOF) and sudden variceal bleeding in sinusoidal obstruction syndrome. The relative simplicity and effectiveness of RPA in presence of SRS allowed us to rely more and more often on this technique in liver transplantation with challenging non-complex PVT.

Nonmalignant portal vein thrombi in patients with cirrhosis consist of intimal fibrosis with or without a fibrin-rich thrombus

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a common complication of cirrhosis. The exact pathophysiology remains largely unknown, and treatment with anticoagulants does not lead to recanalization of the portal vein in all patients. A better insight into the structure and composition of portal vein thrombi may assist in developing strategies for the prevention and treatment of PVT.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Sixteen prospectively and 63 retrospectively collected nonmalignant portal vein thrombi from patients with cirrhosis who underwent liver transplantation were included. Histology, immunohistochemistry, and scanning electron microscopy were used to assess structure and composition of the thrombi. Most recent CT scans were reanalyzed for thrombus characteristics. Clinical characteristics were related to histological and radiological findings. All samples showed a thickened, fibrotic tunica intima. Fibrin-rich thrombi were present on top of the fibrotic intima in 9/16 prospective cases and in 21/63 retrospective cases. A minority of the fibrotic areas stained focally positive for fibrin/fibrinogen (16% of cases), von Willebrand factor (VWF; 10%), and CD61 (platelets, 21%), while most of the fibrin-rich areas stained positive for those markers (fibrin/fibrinogen, 100%; VWF, 77%; CD61, 100%). No associations were found between clinical characteristics including estimated thrombus age and use of anticoagulants and presence of fibrin-rich thrombi.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that PVT in patients with cirrhosis consists of intimal fibrosis with an additional fibrin-rich thrombus in only one-third of cases. We hypothesize that our observations may explain why not all portal vein thrombi in patients with cirrhosis recanalize by anticoagulant therapy.

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.

Meta-analysis and systematic review: Prevalence, graft failure, mortality, and post-operative thrombosis in liver transplant recipients with pre-operative portal vein thrombosis

AIMS

This study seeks to evaluate the association between pre-transplant portal vein thrombosis (PVT) and overall survival, graft failure, waitlist mortality, and post-operative PVT after liver transplantation.

METHODS

A conventional pairwise meta-analysis between patients with and without pre-transplant PVT was conducted using hazard ratios or odds ratios where appropriate.

RESULTS

Prevalence of preoperative PVT was 11.6% (CI 9.70-13.7%). Pre-operative PVT was associated with increased overall mortality (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.27-1.65) and graft loss (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.34-1.85). In particular, grade 3 (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.00-2.51) and 4 (HR 2.24, 95% CI 1.45-3.45) PVT significantly increased mortality, but not grade 1 or 2 PVT. Patients with PVT receiving living donor (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.24-1.91) and deceased donor (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.21-1.92) liver transplantation had increased mortality, with no significant difference between transplant types (P = .13). Furthermore, pre-transplant PVT was associated with higher occurrence of post-transplant PVT (OR 5.06, 95% CI 3.89-6.57). Waitlist mortality was not significantly increased in patients with pre-transplant PVT.

CONCLUSION

Graft failure, mortality, and post-operative PVT are more common in pre-transplant PVT patients, especially in grade 3 or 4 PVT. Prophylactic anticoagulation can be considered to reduce re-thrombosis and improve survival.

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.

Liver Transplantation in Malignancies: A Comprehensive and Systematic Review on Oncological Outcome

Introduction

Liver transplantation (LT) is today's standard treatment for both end-stage liver disease and tumors; however, suitable grafts for LT are a scarce resource and outcome after LT is highly dependent on its underlying indication. Thus, patients must be carefully selected to optimize the number of life years gained per graft. This comprehensive and systematic review critically reflects the most recently published oncological outcome data after LT in malignancies based on the preoperative radiological findings.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted to detect preferentially most recent high-volume series or large database analysis on oncological outcomes after LT for both primary liver cancer and liver metastases between January 1, 2019, and November 14, 2020. A comprehensive review on the radiological assessment of the reviewed liver malignancies is included and its preoperative value for an outcome-driven indication reflected.

Results

Twenty most recent high-volume or relevant studies including a total number of 2,521 patients were identified including 4, 4, 4, 4, 3, and 1 publications on oncological outcome after LT for hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocellular carcinoma, hepatic epitheloid hemangioendothelioma, hepatoblastoma, and both metastatic neuroendocrine tumors and colorectal cancer, respectively. The overall survival is comparable to patients without tumors if patients with malignancies are well selected for LT; however, this is highly dependent on tumor entity, tumor stage, and both neoadjuvant and concomitant treatment.

Discussion/Conclusion

LT is a promising option for better survival in patients with malignant liver tumors in selected patients; however, the indication must be critically discussed prior to LT in every single case in the context of organ shortage.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts in portal vein thrombosis: A review

The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) has previously been considered a contraindication to the insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSS). However, patients with PVT may have portal hypertension complications and may thus benefit from TIPSS to reduce portal venous pressure. There is an increasing body of literature that discusses the techniques and outcomes of TIPSS in PVT. This review summarizes the techniques, indications and outcomes of TIPSS in PVT in published case reports, case series and comparative trials, especially regarding the reduction in portal hypertensive complications such as variceal bleeding. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using MEDLINE and PubMed databases. Manuscripts published in English between 1 January 1990 and 1 March 2021 were used. Abstracts were screened and data from potentially relevant articles analyzed. TIPSS in PVT has been reported with high levels of technical success, short-term portal vein recanalization and long-term PV patency and TIPSS patency outcomes. Several comparative studies, including randomized controlled trials, have shown favorable outcomes of TIPSS compared with non-TIPSS treatment of PVT complications. Outcomes of TIPSS with PVT appear similar to those in TIPSS without PVT. However, TIPSS may be more technically difficult in the presence of PVT, and such procedures should be performed in expert high-volume centers to mitigate the risk of procedural complications. The presence of PVT should no longer be considered a contraindication to TIPSS. TIPSS for PVT has been acknowledged as a therapeutic strategy in recent international guidelines, although further studies are needed before recommendations can be strengthened. KEY POINTS: Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is no longer a contraindication to the insertion of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPSS) TIPSS often leads to the spontaneous dissolution of PVT, but can be combined with mechanical or pharmacological thrombectomy TIPSS reduces portal hypertensive complications of PVT, such as variceal bleeding, and can also facilitate liver transplantation where PVT may otherwise interfere with vascular anastomoses Studies have shown favorable long-term outcomes of TIPSS compared with TIPSS without PVT; as well as compared with non-TIPSS treatment of PVT complications TIPSS in PVT should be performed in high-volume specialist centers due to technical difficulties.

Current knowledge and management of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is an increasingly recognised complication of cirrhosis whose incidence increases in parallel with the severity of cirrhosis. Several risk factors have been associated with the occurrence and progression of PVT. Although the negative effect of complete PVT on the surgical outcome of liver transplant recipients is clear, its impact on cirrhosis progression remains uncertain. Treatment options include anticoagulants and interventional thrombolytic therapies, which are chosen almost on a case-by-case basis depending on the characteristics of the patient and the thrombus. In this manuscript, we review current knowledge regarding the epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis and classification, natural history, clinical consequences and treatment of non-neoplastic PVT in cirrhosis.

Anticoagulation and Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt for the Management of Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhosis: A Prospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines recommend anticoagulation as the mainstay of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) treatment in cirrhosis. However, because of the heterogeneity of PVT, anticoagulation alone does not always achieve satisfactory results. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate an individualized management algorithm using a wait-and-see strategy (i.e., no treatment), anticoagulation, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) to treat PVT in cirrhosis.

METHODS

Between February 2014 and June 2018, 396 consecutive patients with cirrhosis with nonmalignant PVT were prospectively included in a tertiary care center, of which 48 patients (12.1%) were untreated, 63 patients (15.9%) underwent anticoagulation, 88 patients (22.2%) underwent TIPS, and 197 patients (49.8%) received TIPS plus post-TIPS anticoagulation. The decision of treatment option mainly depends on the stage of liver disease (symptomatic portal hypertension or not) and degree and extension of thrombus.

RESULTS

During a median 31.7 months of follow-up period, 312 patients (81.3%) achieved partial (n = 25) or complete (n = 287) recanalization, with 9 (3.1%) having rethrombosis, 64 patients (16.2%) developed major bleeding (anticoagulation-related bleeding in 7 [1.8%]), 88 patients (22.2%) developed overt hepatic encephalopathy, and 100 patients (25.3%) died. In multivariate competing risk regression models, TIPS and anticoagulation were associated with a higher probability of recanalization. Long-term anticoagulation using enoxaparin or rivaroxaban rather than warfarin was associated with a decreased risk of rethrombosis and an improved survival, without increasing the risk of bleeding. However, the presence of complete superior mesenteric vein thrombosis was associated with a lower recanalization rate, increased risk of major bleeding, and poor prognosis.

DISCUSSION

In patients with cirrhosis with PVT, the individualized treatment algorithm achieves a high-probability recanalization, with low rates of portal hypertensive complications and adverse events.

The Impact of Portal Vein Thrombosis on Liver Transplant Outcomes: Does Grade or Flow Rate Matter?

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) makes the technical aspect of liver transplantation challenging and also affects outcomes. Our aim was to study impact of PVT grade and postreperfusion portal flow on posttransplant outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent transplantation with PVT between January 2007 and May 2017 were selected (n = 126). Data on grade of PVT and portal vein flow were collected. Patients were classified into 2 groups; low grade (Yerdel Grade I, n = 73) and high grade (Yerdel Grade II or III, n = 53). Using portal flow rate, patients were divided into high flow (≥1000 mL/min, n = 95) and low flow (<1000 mL/min, n = 31). Additional analyses of flow by graft weight and complications were performed.

RESULTS

Postoperatively, incidence of biliary strictures were significantly greater in high-grade PVT compared with low grade (P = 0.02). Incidence of postoperative portal vein thrombosis was higher in low flow after reperfusion compared with high flow (P = 0.02), as was bile leak (P = 0.02). On identifying factors associated with graft loss, moderate to severe ascites preoperatively, high PVT grade and bile leak were associated with worse graft survival. Subanalysis performed combining grade and flow showed that low grade, high flow had the highest graft survival while high grade, low flow had the lowest (P = 0.006). High-grade PVT with low flow also appeared to be an independent risk factor for biliary complications (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, biliary complications, especially strictures are more common in high-grade PVT and graft survival is worse in high-grade PVT and low portal flow.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Multivisceral transplant as an option to transplant cirrhotic patients with severe portal vein thrombosis

Non-tumoral portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a critical complication in the patient with advanced cirrhosis awaiting liver transplantation (LT). With the evolution of liver transplant (LT) technique, PVT has morphed from an absolute contraindication to a relative contraindication, depending on the grade of the thrombus. The Yerdel classification is one system of grading PVT severity. Patients with Yerdel class 1-3 PVT can undergo LT at centers with experience in complex portal vein (PV) dissection, thrombectomy, and reconstruction. Class 4 PVT, however, is even more complex and may require heroic techniques such as cavoportal hemitransposition, PV arterialization or multivisceral transplant (MVT). Some centers use a MVT back-up approach for patients with Yerdel class 4 PVT. In these patients, all organs with PV outflow are procured simultaneously as a cluster graft from a deceased donor (liver, pancreas, intestine±stomach). If physiologic PV inflow is established intraoperatively, the recipient undergoes LT. Otherwise the MVT graft is transplanted. MVT establishes physiologic PV flow, but transplantation of the intestine confers significant lifelong risks including rejection, graft-versus host disease and post-transplant lymphoma. Yerdel class 1-4 PVT patients undergoing successful LT have 5-year survival similar to non-PVT patients, while patients requiring full MVT experience somewhat higher mortality because of the complexity of the surgery and medical management.