Efficacy and safety of anticoagulation in non-malignant portal vein thrombosis in patients with liver cirrhosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anticoagulation in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis: Friend or Foe?

Concepts regarding the status of the coagulation process in cirrhosis are rapidly changing. Instead of a disease defined by excessive bleeding risk, recent studies have shown cirrhosis to be associated with a fragile state of rebalanced hemostasis, easily swayed in either direction, thrombosis, or bleeding. These findings, combined with the ever-growing population of patients with cirrhosis with an indication for anticoagulation (AC) and the emergence of the non-alcoholic fatty liver disease epidemic, have prompted a reexamination of the use of AC in patients with cirrhosis, either as a treatment for a concurrent thrombotic disorder or even as a possible therapeutic option that could influence the natural course of the disease and its complications. In recent years, a significant number of studies have been formulated to evaluate these possibilities. These studies evaluated, among others, the efficacy and safety of AC in thrombotic disorders or thrombotic complications of cirrhosis, its effect on survival, and the class of anticoagulants which is more suitable for patients with cirrhosis, depending on disease severity. This review examines recent studies investigating the use of AC in patients with cirrhosis and attempts to provide a simple guide for clinicians regarding the use of AC in patients with cirrhosis and its potential risks and benefits.

Anticoagulant therapy for splanchnic vein thrombosis: recent updates for patients with liver cirrhosis

INTRODUCTION

Liver cirrhosis is accompanied by several hemostatic alterations, which contribute to the current theory of "rebalanced hemostasis." Splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) is a frequent complication of liver cirrhosis (17-26% of the cirrhotic patients), and liver cirrhosis is a common risk factor for SVT (24-28% of SVT cases).

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review aims to describe the current state of the art on the anticoagulant treatment of cirrhotic SVT, with a particular focus on the possible role of the direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and recent guidelines on this topic.

EXPERT OPINION

Early anticoagulant therapy is recommended in cirrhotic patients with acute SVT, to obtain vessel recanalization and decrease the rates of portal hypertension-related complications. Gastroesophageal varices do not represent a contraindication to anticoagulation, if adequate prophylaxis of variceal bleeding is established, and varices band ligation can be safely performed without the need to stop the anticoagulant treatment. The conventional treatment of cirrhotic SVT consisted of low molecular weight heparin, as initial treatment of choice, eventually followed by vitamin K antagonists, but the DOACs can be considered as a reasonable alternative in patients with compensated liver cirrhosis.

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.

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.

Clots in unusual places: lots of stress, limited data, critical decisions

Although much less common than deep vein thrombosis of the lower extremities or lungs, clots in unusual locations, including the splanchnic, cerebral, retinal, upper-extremity, and renal locations, present with significant morbidity and mortality. In the last 2 decades, treatment of clots in these unusual locations is primarily managed medically, with interventional and surgical approaches reserved for more severe or refractory cases. The hematologist is well positioned to provide consultation to organ-specific specialties (ie, neurosurgery, hepatology, ophthalmology), especially because acquired and congenital hypercoagulability plays a major role, and anticoagulation is often the primary treatment. Historically, treatment has been based on expert opinion, but systematic reviews and meta-analyses have recently been published. Various societies have produced guidelines for the treatment of clots in unusual locations; however, randomized clinical trial data remain scarce. In the last few years, increasing data have emerged concerning the efficacy of the direct oral anticoagulants in treating clots in unusual locations. Cases have recently been described highlighting atypical thrombosis associated with COVID-19 infection as well as with the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca) vaccine and Johnson and Johnson's Janssen Ad26.COV2.S vaccine. This article reviews clots in unusual locations with an emphasis on the splanchnic (mesenteric, portal, splenic, hepatic) and cerebral circulation. Through a case-based approach, key questions are posed, and data are presented to help guide diagnosis and treatment.

Evidence-Based Minireview: Should warfarin or a direct oral anticoagulant be used in patients presenting with thrombosis in the splanchnic or cerebral veins?

Case 1: A 23-year-old female third-year medical student who has no medical history seeks treatment for abdominal distention. She takes an estrogen-containing birth control pill and does not smoke or consume alcohol. Family history is unremarkable. Physical examination is significant for abdominal distention, and an abdominal fluid wave is detected. Complete blood count is normal. Imaging confirms occlusive thrombosis of the main portal vein. On endoscopy, grade 1 to 2 esophageal varices are noted and banded. Unfractionated heparin is begun. Subsequent workup reveals a homozygous factor V Leiden mutation. Long-term anticoagulation is planned, and she asks if warfarin can be avoided given her hectic ward rotations, erratic diet, and need for monitoring. Case 2: A 35-year-old woman who has no medical history seeks treatment for progressively worsening posterior headaches for 1 week. Magnetic resonance imaging of the brain shows dural sinus thrombosis with associated small areas of petechial cerebral hemorrhage. She is started on a continuous unfractionated heparin infusion and admitted to the hospital for further observation. Her grandmother is on warfarin for atrial fibrillation, and the patient would prefer to avoid warfarin because she does not think she can comply with the frequent monitoring that will be required. She inquires about other oral anticoagulant options for her condition.

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.

Rivaroxaban-calibrated chromogenic anti-Xa assay in cirrhosis: Use to rule out disseminated intravascular coagulation

Peritoneovenous shunts (PVSs) are used to relieve ascites in cirrhosis. Disseminated intervascular coagulation (DIC) is a complication of PVSs requiring immediate PVS removal. We report a patient who developed new elevations of prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) 6 hours after PVS placement, concerning for new-onset DIC. We address the key clinical question of distinguishing DIC from rivaroxaban effect on labs. The patient took rivaroxaban 3 hours after PVS placement, suggesting rivaroxaban effect. Rivaroxaban-calibrated anti-Xa level was in the expected treatment range. Over 12 hours, coagulation labs and rivaroxaban levels declined, with no evidence of DIC. The sudden PT/aPTT increase was attributed to rivaroxaban, however, the distinction between DIC and rivaroxaban effect was possible only with the rapid availability of rivaroxaban levels. While there are no US Food and Drug Administration-approved tests for rivaroxaban levels in the United States, this case demonstrates they can have significant clinical impact, encouraging more widespread adaptation of these assays.

Treatment of direct oral anticoagulants in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis

Although patients with cirrhosis are known to be in a state of “rebalance” in that pro- and anticoagulant factors increase the risk for both bleeding and thrombosis, the prevalence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in patients with cirrhosis can be up to 26%. Therefore, physicians should consider anticoagulation for the prevention and management of PVT in patients with cirrhosis who are at high risk of PVT. Vitamin K antagonist or low molecular weight heparin is suggested as the standard treatment for PVT in cirrhosis. With the advent of new direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs), there is a paradigm shift of switching to DOACs for the treatment of PVT in patients with cirrhosis. However, the safety and efficacy of DOACs in the treatment of PVT was not well-known in patients with cirrhosis. Therefore, this review focused on the current knowledge about the efficacy, safety concerns, and hepatic metabolism of DOACs in patients with cirrhosis and PVT.