Safety and Efficacy of Anticoagulation in Patients with Cirrhosis: A Meta-Analysis

Risk of Bleeding in Liver Cirrhosis Receiving Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

 Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are effective for the management of thromboembolic disorders. However, bleeding remains a major concern in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs.

METHODS

 PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The incidence of bleeding episodes in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs was pooled. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated to compare the incidence of bleeding episodes in cirrhotic patients who received DOACs versus those who received conventional anticoagulants and did not receive anticoagulants.

RESULTS

 Twenty-nine studies were included. All bleeding, major bleeding, fatal bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, and intracranial hemorrhage episodes were observed in 310/2,469, 100/1,388, 2/611, 166/1,886, and 5/1,147 cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs, respectively. Their pooled incidences were 13, 6, 0, 8, and 0%, respectively. They became higher in subgroup analyses of studies with advanced age, a longer treatment duration, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh class C. Compared with conventional anticoagulants, DOACs were associated with lower incidences of all bleeding (OR = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.52-0.98) and major bleeding (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.37-0.83) in cirrhotic patients, but not those of fatal bleeding (OR = 0.21, 95% CI = 0.04-1.28), gastrointestinal bleeding (OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.52-1.17), or intracranial hemorrhage (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.12-1.12). The incidences of all bleeding (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.22-4.79) and major bleeding (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.26-3.61) did not significantly differ between cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis (PVT) who received DOACs and those who did not receive anticoagulants.

CONCLUSION

 DOACs carry a low risk of bleeding in liver cirrhosis. Age, treatment duration, and Child-Turcotte-Pugh class may be associated with bleeding in cirrhotic patients receiving DOACs. The risk of bleeding is not increased by DOACs in cirrhotic patients with PVT.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been becoming prevalent in recent years and are increasingly used in the treatment of port vein thrombosis. The difference of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran remains unclear in the treatment of cirrhotic patients with acute portal vein thrombosis (PVT).

METHODS

This retrospective study included all consecutive cirrhotic patients with acute portal vein thrombosis in our institute from January 2020 to December 2021. The patients received oral anticoagulation with rivaroxaban or dabigatran. The demographic, clinical, and imaging data of patients were collected. The diagnosis of acute PVT was confirmed by imaging examinations. The severity of liver cirrhosis was assessed using Child-Pugh score and Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. Outcomes included recanalization (complete, partial, and persistent occlusion), liver function, bleedings, and survival. The log-rank test was used to compare Kaplan-Meier distributions of time-to-event outcomes. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients were included, 52 patients (55%) received rivaroxaban and 42 (45%) with dabigatran. The complete and partial recanalization of PVT was observed in 41 patients. There was no significant difference in complete recanalization, partial recanalization, and persistent occlusion between the two groups. With multivariate analysis, D-dimer (HR 1.165, 95% CI 1.036-1.311, p = 0.011) was independent predictors of complete recanalization. The Child-Pugh score (p = 0.001) was significantly improved in both two groups after anticoagulation, respectively. However, there was no difference between the two groups. The probability of survival was 94%, 95% in the rivaroxaban and dabigatran groups (log-rank p = 0.830). Major bleedings were reported in 3 patients (6%) in rivaroxaban group and 1 patient (2%) in dabigatran group (p = 0.646). Six patients (12%) in rivaroxaban group experienced minor bleeding, and five (12%) from dabigatran group (p = 0.691).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety were comparable between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the treatment of cirrhotic patients with acute portal vein thrombosis. And D-dimer can contribute to the prediction of PVT recanalization in cirrhotic patients.

Rivaroxaban combined with repeat hepatectomy for treatment of cirrhosis-related acute portal vein thrombosis with hepatocellular carcinoma: A case report

BACKGROUND

Acute portal vein thrombosis (PVT) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a severe complication of liver cirrhosis and its prognosis is affected by clinical decision to a large extent, while the order of management, the approaches of treatment, and the adjustment of the plan are all the key and difficult points.

CASE SUMMARY

This case was treated with low molecular weight heparin (4000 U/12 h) for 14 d, followed by rivaroxaban (10 mg/12 h) and then partial hepatectomy twice, of which the first was performed 1 mo after anticoagulation, and the second was performed 4 mo later, by which the primary lesion and postoperative new lesion were resected, respectively. Rivaroxaban was taken constantly except the perioperative period, while gingival bleeding occurred after 8 mo of anticoagulation, so suspension of rivaroxaban was carried out for 1 wk, after which the bleeding was relieved, and a half dose of rivaroxaban (10 mg/d) was used to continue anticoagulation from then on. The thrombus remained recanalized and there was no tumor recurrence during the following 2 years.

CONCLUSION

When there are indications for anticoagulation and partial hepatectomy in patients with cirrhosis-related acute PVT with HCC, anticoagulation followed by surgery is recommended, as anticoagulation may reduce thrombosis in a short time, which could not only decrease the risk of surgery, but also have little influence on the opportunity of tumor treatment. And when recurrence of HCC occurs, if possible, repeat hepatectomy should be considered to improve the prognosis. Anticoagulant strategy should be adjusted accordingly if rivaroxaban causes bleeding, and it should be stopped or reduced after the bleeding is stable.

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.

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.

The Efficacy and Safety of Anticoagulants in the Treatment of Cirrhotic Portal Vein Thrombosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of anticoagulant therapy in patients with cirrhotic PVT, and compare differences in efficacy and safety among different anticoagulants.

Methods

We comprehensively searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to April 2022 for studies using anticoagulants for cirrhotic PVT. Meta-analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results

3 RCTs and 14 cohort studies involving 1270 patients were included. Anticoagulant therapy can increase the recanalization rate compared with non-anticoagulation therapy (OR 4.44, 95% CI 3.11-6.32, I² = 2.5%) and can decrease the extension rate of cirrhotic PVT (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.62, I² = 41.0%), without increasing the incidence of total bleeding (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.75-1.97, I² = 9.8%), major bleeding (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.49-1.95, I² = 19.7%), and variceal bleeding (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.12-1.01, I² = 39.9%). Subgroup analysis showed that VKA, LMWH, and DOACs could increase the recanalization rate of PVT and were not associated with the risk of bleeding. Studies that compared direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with warfarin directly showed that the recanalization rate of PVT in the DOACs group might be higher than that in the warfarin group (OR 30.99, 95% CI 7.39-129.87, I² = 0.0%), and there was no difference in the rate of total bleeding (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.01-8.65, I² = 79.6%).

Conclusions

Anticoagulants are safe and effective in patients with cirrhotic PVT. The rate of PVT recanalization associated with DOACs may be higher than warfarin.