Management of nonneoplastic portal vein thrombosis in the setting of liver transplantation: a systematic review. Transplantation. 2012;94:1145-1153. [PMID: 23128996 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0b013e31826e8e53]

Predictive value of hepatic venous pressure gradient in cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis development

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There are lots of risk factors reported for cirrhotic portal vein thrombosis (PVT) development, however, the relationship between hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) and PVT development remains unclear.

METHODS

The clinical outcomes of cirrhotic patients who had no PVT and underwent HVPG measurement at baseline between March 2018 and March 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. Screening for non-tumoral PVT development was implemented by contrast-enhanced computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance imaging every 6-12 months.

RESULTS

Eighty-two cirrhotic patients were evaluated over a follow-up period. Of these, 12 patients (14.6%) experienced the development of PVT. The occurrence of non-tumoral PVT at one, two, and three years were 6.6%, 11.7%, and 22.2% respectively. HVPG (p=0.038;HR 1.07;95%CI 1.00-1.14) and alcohol liver disease (ALD) (p=0.019;HR 4.20;95%CI 1.27-13.89) were independently associated with a high PVT risk. The cutoff value of HVPG was 17.52 mmHg. The cumulative incidence of PVT differed significantly among groups stratified by HVPG thresholds of 16mmHg (P=0.011). The sensitivity and specificity of HVPG≥16mmHg in predicting PVT development were 100.0% and 35.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with liver cirrhosis, the value of HVPG was the independent predictive factor of PVT development. Screening for PVT was recommended during follow-up in patients with HVPG≥16 mmHg.

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.

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.

Efficacy and safety of precision-guided transjugular extrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TEPS) in the management of cavernous transformation of the portal vein with portal hypertension: a case series

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Performing a Transjugular intrahepatic portal system shunt (TIPS) in patients with portal vein cavernous transformation (CTPV) poses significant challenges. As an alternative, transjugular extrahepatic portal vein shunt (TEPS) may offer a potential solution for these patients. Nonetheless, the effectiveness and safety of TEPS remain uncertain. This case series study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TEPS in treating patients with CTPV portal hypertension complications.

METHODS

The study encompassed a cohort of 22 patients diagnosed with CTPV who underwent TEPS procedures. Of these, 13 patients manifested recurrent hemorrhagic episodes subsequent to conventional therapies, 8 patients grappled with recurrent or refractory ascites, and 1 patient experienced acute bleeding but refused endoscopic treatment. Comprehensive postoperative monitoring was conducted for all patients to rigorously evaluate both the technical and clinical efficacy of the intervention, as well as long-term outcomes.

RESULTS

The overall procedural success rate among the 22 patients was 95.5% (21/22).During the TEPS procedure, nine patients were guided by percutaneous splenic access, three patients were guided by percutaneous hepatic access, five patients were guided by transmesenteric vein access from the abdomen, and two patients were guided by catheter marking from the hepatic artery. Additionally, guidance for three patients was facilitated by pre-existing TIPS stents. The postoperative portal pressure gradient following TEPS demonstrated a statistically significant decrease compared to preoperative values (24.95 ± 3.19 mmHg vs. 11.48 ± 1.74 mmHg, p < 0.01).Although three patients encountered perioperative complications, their conditions ameliorated following symptomatic treatment, and no procedure-related fatalities occurred. During a median follow-up period of 14 months, spanning a range of 5 to 39 months, we observed four fatalities. Specifically, one death was attributed to hepatocellular carcinoma, while the remaining three were ascribed to chronic liver failure. During the follow-up period, no instances of shunt dysfunction were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Precision-guided TEPS appears to be a safe and efficacious intervention for the management of CTPV.

Impossible Yet Possible-Orthotopic Liver Transplantation in a Patient With Complete Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Case Report and Literature Review

This case study presents a liver transplantation (LT) in a patient with incidentally, intraoperatively detected complete portal vein thrombosis (PVT), classified as YERDEL stage 4, challenging traditional surgical boundaries. The patient's resilience and the innovative approach adopted by the surgical team exemplify the evolving complexities of LT in the context of advanced PVT. This report underscores the significance of detailed case documentation in medical literature, especially for complex transplant scenarios. It contributes to a broader understanding of surgical techniques and patient-centered approaches in LT. The narrative highlights the dynamic interplay between surgical advancements and vascular complications, advocating for the refinement of surgical methods and a reevaluation of conventional perspectives in transplantation. This case is pivotal in illustrating medical progress and the persistent pursuit of better outcomes in complex transplant situations.

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.

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.

Intestinal and Multivisceral Transplantation: Complications

Advancements in immunosuppression protocols, surgical techniques, and postoperative care in the last few decades have improved outcomes of intestinal transplant patients. Normal immediate postoperative imaging appearance can simulate pathology. Intestinal transplant recipients are prone for several postoperative complications due to the complex surgical technique, which involves multiple anastomoses, and immunogenic nature of the allograft intestine. Imaging plays a crucial role in detection of several major complications including infectious, immunologic, vascular, gastrointestinal, pancreaticobiliary, genitourinary, and neoplastic complications. The awareness of the posttransplant anatomy and normal imaging appearances helps radiologists anticipate and accurately detect posttransplant complications.

Portal vein reconstruction in pediatric liver transplantation using end-to-side jump graft: A case report

Attenuated portal vein (PV) flow is challenging in pediatric liver transplantation (LT) because it is unsuitable for classic end-to-end jump graft reconstruction from a small superior mesenteric vein (SMV). We thus introduce a novel technique of an end-to-side jump graft from SMV during pediatric LT using an adult partial liver graft. We successfully performed two cases of end-to-side retropancreatic jump graft using an iliac vein graft for PV reconstruction. One patient was a 2-year-old boy with hepatoblastoma and a Yerdel grade 3 PV thrombosis who underwent split LT. Another patient was an 8-month-old girl who had biliary atresia and PV hypoplasia with stenosis on the confluence level of the SMV; she underwent retransplantation because of graft failure related to PV thrombosis. After native PV was resected at the SMV confluence level, an end-to-side reconstruction was done from the proximal SMV to an interposition iliac vein. The interposition vein graft through posterior to the pancreas was obliquely anastomosed to the graft PV. There was no PV related complication during the follow-up period. Using a jump vascular graft in an end-to-side manner to connect the small native SMV and the large graft PV is a feasible treatment option in pediatric recipients with inadequate portal flow due to thrombosis or hypoplasia of the PV.

Anticoagulation therapy for portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent complication of cirrhosis, which is significantly associated with progressive hepatic decompensation such as ascites and a high mortality risk. Anticoagulation may associate with higher PVT regression rates, but the safety of anticoagulation should be considered.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation therapy for PVT in patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of cirrhotic patients diagnosed with PVT from January 2018 to December 2021, comparing those who received anticoagulation therapy to those who did not. Thirty-two patients received low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), warfarin, or rivaroxaban (anticoagulation group), and 52 were untreated (non-anticoagulation group). All patients were followed to assess the evolution of PVT (thrombus regression, stable, and progression) and the adverse effects of anticoagulation therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were followed for a median 13 mo (IQR: 6-24 mo). Thirty-two patients (38.1%) received anticoagulation therapy. Anticoagulation therapy was associated with a higher PVT regression rate (50.0% vs 23.1%, P = 0.010) (univariable hazard ratio [HR] for regression of PVT with anticoagulation = 0.300, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.116-0.773, P = 0.013; multivariable HR for regression of PVT with anticoagulation = 0.185, 95%CI: 0.061-0.560, P = 0.003). Anticoagulation therapy was stopped in six patients because of adverse effects, of which two were due to abdominal pain, two due to gastrointestinal bleeding, and two due to hematuria. Symptoms improved after drug withdrawal.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support anticoagulation therapy in cirrhotic patients with non-malignant PVT, since anticoagulation seems safe and associated with superior PVT regression rates.

Portal Vein Thrombosis in Liver Transplantation: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Portal vein thrombosis was considered a contraindication for liver transplantation. This study analyzes the perioperative complications and survival of liver transplant patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT). A retrospective observational cohort study of liver transplant patients was conducted. The outcomes were early mortality (30 days) and patient survival. A total of 201 liver transplant patients were identified and 34 (17%) patients with PVT were found. The most frequent extension of thrombosis was Yerdel 1 (58.8%), and a portosystemic shunt was identified in 23 (68%) patients. Eleven patients (33%) presented any early vascular complication, PVT being the most frequent (12%). The multivariate regression analysis showed a statistically significant association between PVT and early complications (OR = 3.3, 95% confidence interval 1.4-7.7; p = 0.006). Moreover, early mortality was observed in eight patients (24%), of which two (5.9%) presented Yerdel 2. For Yerdel 1, patient survival according to the extent of thrombosis was 75% at 1 year and 3 years, while for Yerdel 2, it was 65% at 1 year, and 50% at 3 years (p = 0.04). Portal vein thrombosis significantly influenced early vascular complications. Furthermore, portal vein thrombosis Yerdel 2 or higher impacts the survival of liver grafts in the short and long term.

Interventional Approach to Portal Vein Thrombosis and Liver Transplantation: State of the Art

Porto-mesenteric vein thrombosis (PVT) is a well-recognized but uncommon disease entity in patients with and without cirrhosis. Given the complexity of these patients, there are many differing treatment algorithms depending on the individual circumstances of a given patient. The focus of this review is primarily patients with cirrhosis, with an emphasis on liver transplantation considerations. The presence of cirrhosis substantially affects work-up, prognosis, and management of these patients and will substantially affect the patient treatment and have additional implications for prognosis and long-term outcomes. Here, we review the incidence of portal vein thrombosis in known cirrhotic patients, medical and interventional treatment options that are currently used, and, in particular, how to approach cirrhotic patients with PVT who are awaiting liver transplantation.

Portal cavernoma in type 1 neurofibromatosis: A fortuitous or causal association?

Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF-1) is a multisystem genetic disorder affecting the NF1 tumor suppressor gene. Patients typically develop superficial (cutaneous) and internal (plexiform) neurofibromas. The latter may rarely involve the liver locating in the hilum and encasing the portal vessels, leading to portal hypertension. Vascular abnormalities (NF-I vasculopathy) are a well-recognized manifestation of NF-1. Although the pathogenesis is not well-known, NF-1 vasculopathy involves arteries of both peripheral and cerebral territories, with venous thrombosis being exceptionally reported. Portal venous thrombosis (PVT) is the leading cause of portal hypertension in childhood and has been associated with several risk factors. Nevertheless, predisposing conditions remain unknown in more than 50% of the cases. The treatment options are limited, and its management is nonconsensual in the pediatric age. We report the case of a 9-year-old boy with clinically and genetically confirmed NF-1, diagnosed with portal venous cavernoma after an episode of gastrointestinal bleeding. There were no identifiable risk factors for PVT and intrahepatic peri-hilar plexiform neurofibroma was excluded by MRI imaging. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of PVT in NF-1. We speculate that NF-1 vasculopathy may have been a pathogenic factor, or instead, it was a fortuitous association.

Portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis: A literature review

Portal Vein Thrombosis (PVT), a common complication of advanced liver disease, is defined as an obstruction of the portal vein due to thrombus formation that can extend to the superior mesenteric and splenic veins. It was believed that PVT occurred predominantly due to prothrombotic potential. However, recent studies have shown that decreased blood flow related to portal hypertension appears to increase PVT risk as per Virchow's triad. It is well known that there is a higher incidence of PVTs in cirrhosis with a higher MELD and Child Pugh score. The controversy for management of PVTs in cirrhotics lies in the individualized assessment of risks versus benefits of anticoagulation, since these patients have a complex hemostatic profile with both bleeding and procoagulant propensities. In this review, we will systematically compile the etiology, pathophysiology, clinical features, and management of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.

Alternative forms of portal vein revascularization in liver transplant recipients with complex portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Complex portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a challenge in liver transplantation (LT). Extra-anatomical approaches to portal revascularization, including renoportal (RPA), left gastric vein (LGA), pericholedochal vein (PCA), and cavoportal (CPA) anastomoses, have been described in case reports and series. The RP4LT Collaborative was created to record cases of alternative portal revascularization performed for complex PVT.

METHODS

An international, observational web registry was launched in 2020. Cases of complex PVT undergoing first LT performed with RPA, LGA, PCA, or CPA were recorded and updated through 12/2021.

RESULTS

A total of 140 cases were available for analysis: 74 RPA, 18 LGA, 20 PCA, and 28 CPA. Transplants were primarily performed with whole livers (98%) in recipients with median (IQR) age 58 (49-63) years, model for end-stage liver disease score 17 (14-24), and cold ischemia 431 (360-505) minutes. Post-operatively, 49% of recipients developed acute kidney injury, 16% diuretic-responsive ascites, 9% refractory ascites (29% with CPA, p <0.001), and 10% variceal hemorrhage (25% with CPA, p = 0.002). After a median follow-up of 22 (4-67) months, patient and graft 1-/3-/5-year survival rates were 71/67/61% and 69/63/57%, respectively. On multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis, the only factor significantly and independently associated with all-cause graft loss was non-physiological portal vein reconstruction in which all graft portal inflow arose from recipient systemic circulation (hazard ratio 6.639, 95% CI 2.159-20.422, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Alternative forms of portal vein anastomosis achieving physiological portal inflow (i.e., at least some recipient splanchnic blood flow reaching transplant graft) offer acceptable post-transplant results in LT candidates with complex PVT. On the contrary, non-physiological portal vein anastomoses fail to resolve portal hypertension and should not be performed.

IMPACT AND IMPLICATIONS

Complex portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a challenge in liver transplantation. Results of this international, multicenter analysis may be used to guide clinical decisions in transplant candidates with complex PVT. Extra-anatomical portal vein anastomoses that allow for at least some recipient splanchnic blood flow to the transplant allograft offer acceptable results. On the other hand, anastomoses that deliver only systemic blood flow to the allograft fail to resolve portal hypertension and should not be performed.

Anticoagulation for Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Decompensated Liver Cirrhosis: Bold and Brave?

Atrial fibrillation is frequently diagnosed in patients with liver cirrhosis, especially in those with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis or alcoholic etiology. Anticoagulant treatment is recommended for thromboembolic protection in patients with atrial fibrillation. Considering the impaired coagulation balance in liver cirrhosis, predisposing patients to bleed or thrombotic events, the anticoagulant treatment is still a matter of debate. Although patients with liver cirrhosis were excluded from the pivotal studies that confirmed the efficacy and safety of the anticoagulant treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation, data from real-life cohorts demonstrated that the anticoagulant treatment in patients with liver cirrhosis could be safe. This review aimed to evaluate the recent data regarding the safety and efficacy of anticoagulant treatment in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. Direct oral anticoagulants are safer than warfarin in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis. In Child-Pugh class C liver cirrhosis, direct oral anticoagulants are contraindicated. New bleeding and ischemic risk scores should be developed especially for patients with liver cirrhosis, and biomarkers for bleeding complications should be implemented in clinical practice to personalize this treatment in a very difficult population represented by decompensated liver cirrhosis patients.

Portal Vein Recanalization-Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (PVR-TIPS) Facilitates Liver Transplantation in Cirrhotic Patients with Occlusive Portal Vein Thrombosis

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a heterogeneous condition with multiple possible etiologies and to varying degrees has historically limited candidacy for liver transplant (LT) in the cirrhotic patient population due to resultant difficulties in constructing a robust portal vein anastomosis. While intraoperative approaches to managing PVT are well-described, methods which approximate normal portal physiology are not always feasible depending on the extent of PVT, and other nonphysiologic techniques are linked with substantial morbidity and poor long-term outcomes. Portal vein recanalization-transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (PVR-TIPS) creation is an efficacious method of restoring physiologic portal flow in cirrhotic patients prior to LT allowing for end-to-end PV anastomosis, and is the product of decades-long institutional expertise in TIPS/LT and the support of a multidisciplinary liver tumor board. To follow is a review of the pertinent pathophysiology of PVT in cirrhosis, the rationale leading to the development and subsequent evolution of the PVR-TIPS procedure, technical lessons learned, and a summary of outcomes to date.

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.

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.

Incident portal vein thrombosis in liver transplant recipients in New Zealand: Predictors of risk and validation of portal vein thrombosis risk index calculator

The risk of spontaneous portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is increased in patients on the waiting list for liver transplantation and increases perioperative risks. A predictive PVT risk-index (PVT-RI) calculator has been proposed to determine the risk of incident PVT. We performed a retrospective analysis on adult liver transplant recipients at the NZ Liver Transplant Unit between January 1998 and February 2020. Variables reviewed included age at listing and transplantation, wait time from listing to transplant, indication for listing, gender, ethnicity, etiology of liver disease, listing MELD score, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), moderate-to-severe ascites, hepatic encephalopathy (>grade 2), transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP), and diabetes. Incident PVT was determined by imaging of patients while on the waiting list and assessment at transplantation. A total of 553 out of 706 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of those 553, 18 (3.3%) patients had incident PVT. The PVT-RI calculator was not validated in our cohort with only one of those 18 (6%) patients having a score of >4.6 (high risk cut-off score). Longer waiting time for transplant and listing for liver failure rather than HCC were independent predictors of the risk of incident PVT. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of PVT in viral vs. non-viral and cholestatic vs. non-cholestatic etiology of chronic liver disease. Patients with longer waiting times on the transplant waiting list should be monitored regularly for PVT.

CAQ Corner: Surgical evaluation for liver transplantation

The evaluation of a liver transplantation candidate is a complex and detailed process that in many cases must be done in an expedited manner because of the critically ill status of some patients with end-stage liver disease. It involves great effort from and the collaboration of multiple disciplines, and during the evaluation several studies and interventions are performed to assess and potentially prepare a patient for liver transplant. Here we review the liver transplantation evaluation from a surgical perspective.

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.

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.

Liver Transplantation After Acute Portal Vein Thrombosis: Case Report

BACKGROUND

Portal vein thrombosis is a relatively frequent complication in patients with liver cirrhosis. Its detection and management are essential to avoid worsening portal hypertension or liver function complications. This complication can also negatively impact or even preclude liver transplant.

CASE PRESENTATION

We report the case of a patient who presented with acute portal vein thrombosis, which allowed the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis and hepatocarcinoma within the Milan criteria. Chemical thrombolysis was performed with a mechanical aspiration of the thrombus, and in a second moment, the patient was submitted to a liver transplant.

CONCLUSIONS

Advances in the therapeutic approach to portal vein thrombosis and surgical techniques have allowed the condition to no longer be an absolute contraindication to liver transplantation. Diagnosis in the acute phase is associated with greater therapeutic success, aiming to avoid the extension of thrombosis and achieve portal vein recanalization.

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.

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.

COVID-19 in Cirrhotic Patients: Is Portal Vein Thrombosis a Potential Complication?

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have demonstrated that thromboembolic events increased in patients with coronavirus infection, usually occurring in elderly patients with severe illness, associated with comorbid diseases such as diabetes and hypertension. Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a rare venous thromboembolic disease occurring typically in patients with an underlying disease such as decompensated cirrhosis with or without hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

AIM

To evaluate incidence of occurrence of acute PVT in cirrhotic patients infected with 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19).

METHODS

This cross-sectional, observational study involved 70 patients of the liver cirrhosis: (group A) 28 patients with liver cirrhosis infected with COVID-19, and 42 patients with liver cirrhosis as the control group matched for age and sex (group B). All patients were subjected to thorough medical history, routine investigations (complete blood count, liver, and renal function tests), imaging in the form of abdominal and Doppler ultrasonography to assess the presence of acute PVT, serum ferritin, D-dimer, C-reactive protein, and PCR of COVID-19 for group A only.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding Doppler ultrasound findings as 3 of the patients in group A had PVT (10.7%), 2 of them had HCC diagnosed by triphasic CT abdomen, and only 1 patient in group B had PVT (2.3%) (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In cirrhotic patients infected with COVID-19, portal vein thrombosis may be a potential complication even in the absence of hepatocellular carcinoma; further prospective studies with longer follow-up may be needed.

Recurrent acute portal vein thrombosis with severe abdominal infection after right hemihepatectomy in a patient with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: A case report and literature review

Introduction and importance

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a serious complication after hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. There have been few studies on recurrent PVT after hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.

Case presentation

We report the case of a 66-year-old woman who was diagnosed with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and treated with right hemihepatectomy. On the sixth day, the patient developed acute portal vein thrombosis, and emergency portal vein incision and surgical thrombectomy were performed. On the seventh day after thrombectomy, the patient developed acute portal vein thrombosis again, and portal vein thrombectomy+portal vein bridging was performed again. There was still thrombosis after the operation. The patient was then treated with superior mesenteric arteriography + indirect portal vein catheterization thrombolysis and local thrombolysis + anticoagulation and systemic anticoagulation therapy. The patient had a complicated abdominal infection. The total hospital stay was 84 days. There was no thrombosis in the portal vein at discharge.

Clinical discussion

Although the procedure was carefully performed with a preoperative plan and fine intraoperative vascular anastomosis, postoperative PVT occurred. There are many factors of portal vein thrombosis, and there are many treatment methods.

Conclusion

PVT often develops in patients with liver cirrhosis postoperatively and after liver transplantation. Recurrent PVT after hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is a rare complication.

•

Recurrent PVT after hepatectomy for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is rare.

•

Artificial blood vessels can avoid portal vein angulation.

•

Surgery combined with interventional therapy and drug therapy are available.

•

The final outcome of the patient is usually good.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Rebalanced hemostasis in liver disease: a misunderstood coagulopathy

The combination of frequently abnormal hemostatic markers and catastrophic bleeding as seen with variceal hemorrhage has contributed to the longstanding misperception that chronic liver disease (CLD) constitutes a bleeding diathesis. Laboratory studies of hemostasis in liver disease consistently challenge this with global coagulation assays incorporating activation of the protein C pathway demonstrating rebalanced hemostasis. It is now recognized that bleeding in CLD is predominantly secondary to portal hypertension (rather than a coagulopathy) and additionally that these patients are at increased risk of venous thrombosis, particularly in the portal venous system. This narrative review describes the current understanding of hemostasis in liver disease, as well as the periprocedural management of hemostasis and anticoagulation for management of venous thromboembolism in patients with CLD.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

PATIENTS/METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Comparison of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt in the Treatment of Cirrhosis With or Without Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Retrospective Study

Aim: The purpose of our study was to conduct a retrospective analysis to compare the effectiveness of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) in the treatment of patients with cirrhosis with or without portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

Methods: We included a total of 203 cirrhosis patients successfully treated with TIPS between January 2015 and January 2018, including 72 cirrhosis patients with PVT (35.5%) and 131 without PVT (64.5%). Our subjects were followed for at least 1 year after treatment with TIPS. Data were collected to estimate the mortality, shunt dysfunction, and complication rates after TIPS creation.

Results: During the mean follow-up time of 19.5 ± 12.8 months, 21 (10.3%) patients died, 15 (7.4%) developed shunt dysfunction, and 44 (21.6%) experienced overt hepatic encephalopathy (OHE). No significant differences in mortality (P = 0.134), shunt dysfunction (P = 0.214), or OHE (P = 0.632) were noted between the groups. Age, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and refractory ascites requiring TIPS were risk factors for mortality. A history of diabetes, percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization (PTVE), 8-mm diameter stent, and platelet (PLT) increased the risk of shunt dysfunction. The prevalence of variceal bleeding and recurrent ascites was comparable between the two groups (16.7 vs. 16.7% P = 0.998 and 2.7 vs. 3.8% P = 0.678, respectively).

Conclusions: Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts are feasible in the management of cirrhosis with PVT. No significant differences in survival or shunt dysfunction were noted between the PVT and no-PVT groups. The risk of recurrent variceal bleeding, recurrent ascites, and OHE in the PVT group was generally similar to that in the no-PVT group. TIPS represents a potentially feasible treatment option in cirrhosis patients with PVT.

Management of portal vein thrombosis in cirrhotic patients enlisted for liver transplantation: From diagnosis to treatment (Review)

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) commonly occurs in patients with cirrhosis. Several classification systems of PVT have been proposed over the years reflecting the challenge in establishing a widely accepted system. To date, PVT has been considered an absolute contraindication for orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) since it is associated with decreased graft survival and increased patient mortality. Nevertheless, the development of modern surgical techniques has enabled the inclusion of these candidates in OLT waiting lists, since their postoperative results are shown to be comparable to those of patients without PVT. The aim of the present review was to critically appraise the available treatment options for cirrhotic patients enlisted for liver transplantation in the setting of PVT.

Liver transplantation in patients with non-neoplastic portal vein thrombosis: 20 years of experience in a single center

BACKGROUND

The Yerdel classification is widely used for describing the severity of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in liver transplant (LT) candidates, but might not accurately predict transplant outcome.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed data regarding 97 adult patients with PVT who underwent LT, investigating whether the complexity of portal reconstruction could better correlate with transplant outcome than the site and extent of the thrombosis.

RESULTS

79/97 (80%) patients underwent thrombectomy and anatomical anastomosis (TAA), 18/97 (20%) patients underwent non-anatomical physiological reconstructions (non-TAA). PVT Yerdel grade was 1-2 in 72/97 (74%) patients, and 3-4 in 25/97 (26%) patients. Univariate analysis revealed higher 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, 1-year mortality, and a higher rate of severe early complications in the non-TAA group than in the TAA group (p = .018, .001, .014, .009, respectively). In the model adjusted for PVT Yerdel grade, non-TAA remained independently associated with higher 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortality (p = .021, .007, and .015, respectively). The portal vein re-thrombosis and overall patient and graft survival rates were similar.

DISCUSSION

In our experience, the complexity of portal reconstruction better correlated with transplant outcome than the Yerdel classification, which did not even appear to be a reliable predictor of the surgical complexity and technique.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of anticoagulation therapy for portal vein thrombosis in patients with cirrhosis: to treat or not to treat?

PURPOSE

To date, the optimal treatment for portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhotic patients has not been established in guidelines or consensus. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of anticoagulation therapy in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (until 31st October 2020) for studies evaluating the effect of anticoagulation therapy on treating PVT in patients with cirrhosis. Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel method.

RESULTS

A total of 13 studies were included in the analysis, comprising 6005 patients. Of these, three were prospective cohort studies, nine were retrospective cohort studies and one was case-control study. Compared to no treatment, anticoagulation therapy was associated with higher rates of PVT recanalization (OR 4.29; 95% CI 3.01-6.13). Anticoagulation therapy demonstrated a significant 74% reduction in PVT extension compared to no treatment (OR 0.26; 95% CI 0.14-0.49). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk of death (OR 0.53; 95% CI 0.20-1.40). However, anticoagulation therapy was associated with slightly higher risk of bleeding compared to no treatment (OR 1.16; 95% CI 1.02-1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

In cirrhotic patients with PVT, anticoagulation therapy helps increase rate of PVT recanalization and improve survival, but may also carry higher risks of bleeding compared to no treatment. Our findings support the use of anticoagulation in cirrhotic patients with PVT.

Portal Hypertension and Ascites: Patient-and Population-centered Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Italian Association for the Study of the Liver (AISF)

Portal hypertension and ascites are two crucial events in the natural history of liver cirrhosis, whose appearance marks a downward shift in the prognosis of the disease. Over the years, several international and national societies have issued clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of portal hypertension and ascites. The present document addresses the needs of an updated guidance on the clinical management of these conditions. Accordingly, the AISF Governing Board appointed a multi-disciplinary committee of experts for drafting an update of the most recent EASL Clinical Practice Guidelines. The aim of this work was to adapt the EASL recommendations to national regulations and resources, local circumstances and settings, infrastructure, and cost/benefit strategies to avoid duplication of efforts and optimize resource utilization. The committee defined the objectives, the key issues and retrieved the relevant evidence by performing a systematic review of the literature. Finally, the committee members (chosen on the basis of their specific expertise) identified the guidelines' key questions and developed them following the PICO format (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes). For each of the PICO questions, the systematic review of the literature was made on the most important scientific databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Embase).

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.

Efficacy and Safety of Nadroparin Calcium-Warfarin Sequential Anticoagulation in Portal Vein Thrombosis in Cirrhotic Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Anticoagulation therapy in portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis is still a matter of debate. Therefore, the aim of this work was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nadroparin calcium-warfarin sequential (NWS) anticoagulation therapy in cirrhotic patients and to find an optimal anticoagulation strategy.

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 the Prognosis of Patients With Cirrhosis: A Retrospective Propensity-Score Matched Study

Objectives: To investigate the impact of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) on cirrhosis decompensation and survival of cirrhosis.

Methods: In this retrospective observational study between January 2012 and August 2020, 117 patients with cirrhotic PVT and 125 patients with cirrhosis were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to reduce the bias. The clinical characteristics of non-tumoral PVT in cirrhosis and its influence on cirrhosis decompensation and survival were analyzed.

Results: The median follow-up for the PVT group was 15 (8.0–23.0) months and for the non-thrombosis group 14 (8.0–23.5) months. The presence of PVT was related with esophageal varices, higher Child-Pugh score and MELD score (P < 0.05). Most PVTs were partial (106/117). Non-occlusive PVT disappeared on later examinations in 32/106 patients (30.19%), of which six patients reappeared. All the 11 patients with occlusive PVT remained occlusive, among which five patients (45.45%) developed portal cavernoma. There was no significant correlation between PVT and decompensation or survival before or after PSM. Multivariate analysis identified only Child-Pugh score (HR = 2.210, 95% CI: 1.332–3.667) and serum sodium level (HR = 0.818, 95% CI: 0.717–0.933) as independent factors for death.

Conclusion: Though PVT is associated with greater Child-Pugh score and MELD score, it has no significant impact on the progression of cirrhosis.

De novo Portal Vein Thrombosis in Non-Cirrhotic Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A 9-Year Prospective Cohort Study

Background and Aims: Approximately 30-40% of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) remains of unknown origin. The association between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and PVT is a matter of debate. This study aimed to investigate the association between PVT and NAFLD. Methods: We included 94 out of 105 consecutive NAFLD patients in this prospective cohort study in addition to 94 from the healthy control group. We evaluated biochemical, clinical, immunological, and histopathological parameters; waist circumference (WC); leptin; adiponectin; and leptin/adiponectin ratio (LAR) for all participants at baseline and every 3 years thereafter. We described the characteristics of participants at baseline and showed individual WC, LAR, and PVT characteristics. Potential parameters to predict PVT development within 9 years were determined. Results: PVT developed in eight (8.5%) patients, mainly in the portal trunk. Univariate analysis showed three PVT-associated factors: diabetes mellitus (P = 0.013), WC (P < 0.001), and LAR (P = 0.002). After adjusting multiple confounding variables, the multivariate model showed that the only significant variables were WC and LAR. By applying the receiver operating characteristic curve, WC had 98.8% specificity, 87.5% sensitivity, and 0.894 area under the curve (AUC) for prediction of PVT (P < 0.001) at cutoff values of > 105 cm. In comparison, LAR had 60.5% specificity, 87.5% sensitivity, and 0.805 AUC for PVT prediction (P < 0.001) at cutoff values of >7.5. Conclusions: This study suggests that increased central obesity and LAR were independently associated with PVT development in non-cirrhotic NAFLD patients, and they should be considered risk factors that may participate in PVT multifactorial pathogenesis.

Massage of the Hepatoduodenal Ligament Recovers Portal Vein Flow Immediately After the Pringle Maneuver in Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

The Pringle maneuver is often used in liver surgery to minimize bleeding during liver transection. Many authors have demonstrated that intermittent use of the Pringle maneuver is safe and effective when performed appropriately. However, some studies have reported that the Pringle maneuver is a significant risk factor for portal vein thrombosis. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of portal vein flow after the Pringle maneuver and the impact that massaging the hepatoduodenal ligament after the Pringle maneuver has on portal vein flow.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated with the Pringle maneuver for hepatectomies performed to treat hepatic disease at our hospital between August 2014 and March 2019 were included in the study (N = 101). We divided these patients into two groups, a massage group and nonmassage group. We measured portal vein blood flow with ultrasonography before and after clamping of the hepatoduodenal ligament. We also evaluated laboratory data after the hepatectomy.

RESULTS

Portal vein flow was significantly lower after the Pringle maneuver than before clamping of the hepatoduodenal ligament. The portal vein flow after the Pringle maneuver was improved following massage of the hepatoduodenal ligament. After hepatectomy, serum prothrombin time was significantly higher and serum C-reactive protein was significantly lower in the massage group than in the nonmassage group.

CONCLUSION

Massaging the hepatoduodenal ligament after the Pringle maneuver is recommended in order to quickly recover portal vein flow during hepatectomy and to improve coagulability.

Increased portal vein diameter is predictive of portal vein thrombosis development in patients with liver cirrhosis

Background

Cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) may have a high risk of hepatic decompensation and increased mortality. This study aimed to investigate if increased portal vein diameter is associated with PVT development.

Methods

A total of 174 cirrhotic patients were enrolled between February 1 and August 31, 2017. All participants were divided into PVT (n=62) and non-PVT (n=112) groups based on the thrombus that was detected by ultrasonography and confirmed by computed tomography angiography (CTA).

Results

The study participants, aged 54.7±10.5 years (PVT) and 55.8±11.6 years (non-PVT), were included in this analysis. The Child-Pugh score of PVT or non-PVT was 6.6±1.3 and 5.8±0.9, respectively. Hepatitis B virus (HBV) is the primary etiological agent of cirrhosis. Logistic regression, receiver operating characteristic (ROC), and nomograph analysis designated portal diameter as the strongest independent risk factor for predicting PVT development [odds ratio (OR): 3.96, area under the ROC curve (AUC): 0.88; P<0.01], and the cutoff with predictive value for PVT development was >12.5 mm. No differences were observed in the overall survival (OS) in cirrhosis with or without PVT or stratifying on portal diameter based on the cutoff value.

Conclusions

Increased portal diameter is associated with an increased risk of PVT development. Patients with cirrhosis and increased portal diameter are a high-risk subgroup that may need thromboprophylaxis.

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.

Association of Splanchnic Vein Thrombosis on Survival: 15-Year Institutional Experience With 1561 Cases

Background Previous studies regarding survival in patients with splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) are limited. This study measured overall survival in a large cohort of SVTs through linkage to population-based data. Methods and Results Using a previously derived text-search algorithm, we screened the reports of all abdominal ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography studies at The Ottawa Hospital over 14 years. Screen-positive reports were manually reviewed by at least 2 authors to identify definite SVT cases by consensus. Images of uncertain studies were independently reviewed by 2 radiologists. One thousand five hundred sixty-one adults with SVT (annual incidence ranging from 2.8 to 5.9 cases/10 000 patients) were linked with population-based data sets to measure the presence of concomitant cancer and survival status. Thrombosis involved multiple veins in 314 patients (20.1%), most commonly the portal vein (n=1410, 90.3%). Compared with an age-sex-year matched population, patients with SVT had significantly reduced survival in particular with local cancer (adjusted relative excess risk for recent cases 12.0 [95% CI, 9.8-14.6] and for remote cases 9.7 [7.7-12.2]), distant cancer (relative excess risk for recent cases 5.7 [4.5-7.3] and for remote cases 5.4 [4.4-6.6]), cirrhosis (relative excess risk 8.2 [5.3-12.7]), and previous venous thromboembolism (relative excess risk 3.8 [2.4-6.0]). One hundred fifty (23.9%) of patients >65 years of age were anticoagulated within 1 month of diagnosis. Conclusions SVT is more common than expected. Most patients have cancer and the portal vein is by far the most common vein involved. Compared with the general population, patients with SVT had significantly reduced survival, particularly in patients with concomitant cancer, cirrhosis, and previous venous thromboembolic disease. Most elderly patients did not receive anticoagulant therapy.