Hemostasis testing in patients with liver dysfunction: Advantages and caveats

D-dimers in advanced liver cirrhosis: Useful biomarker or not?

In clinical practice, the d-dimer levels rule out venous thromboembolism and diagnose disseminated intravascular coagulation. d-dimers increase in both physiological and pathological conditions. Liver cirrhosis, especially in the final stages, is characterized by complex coagulation and fibrinolysis factor disorders. Multiple mechanisms tried to explain the increased d-dimer levels in patients with liver cirrhosis and ascites. The d-dimer cut-off level used to rule out venous thromboembolism in cirrhosis is higher than that used to confirm the diagnosis of VTE or DIC in noncirrhotic patients. The cut-off d-dimer level used for the prognosis of thrombotic events is not standardized in advanced liver cirrhosis. Thus, it is necessary to update the clinical guidelines regarding the usefulness of d-dimer testing in advanced liver cirrhosis and the cut-off d-dimer levels, which should vary based on the detection method.

Efficacy of fresh frozen plasma transfusion in decompensated cirrhosis patients with coagulopathy admitted to ICU: a retrospective cohort study from MIMIC-IV database

We aimed to explore the association between FFP transfusion and outcomes of DC patients with significant coagulopathy. A total of 693 DC patients with significant coagulopathy were analyzed with 233 patients per group after propensity score matching (PSM). Patients who received FFP transfusion were matched with those receiving conventional therapy via PSM. Regression analysis showed FFP transfusion had no benefit in 30-day (HR: 1.08, 95% CI 0.83-1.4), 90-day (HR: 1.03, 95% CI 0.80-1.31) and in-hospital(HR: 1.30, 95% CI 0.90-1.89) mortality, associated with increased risk of liver failure (OR: 3.00, 95% CI 1.78-5.07), kidney failure (OR: 1.90, 95% CI 1.13-3.18), coagulation failure (OR: 2.55, 95% CI 1.52-4.27), respiratory failure (OR: 1.76, 95% CI 1.15-2.69), and circulatory failure (OR: 2.15, 95% CI 1.27-3.64), and even associated with prolonged the LOS ICU (β: 2.61, 95% CI 1.59-3.62) and LOS hospital (β: 6.59, 95% CI 2.62-10.57). In sensitivity analysis, multivariate analysis (HR: 1.09, 95%CI 0.86, 1.38), IPTW (HR: 1.11, 95%CI 0.95-1.29) and CAPS (HR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.86-1.38) showed FFP transfusion had no beneficial effect on the 30-day mortality. Smooth curve fitting demonstrated the risk of liver failure, kidney failure and circulatory failure increased by 3%, 2% and 2% respectively, for each 1 ml/kg increase in FFP transfusion. We found there was no significant difference of CLIF-SOFA and MELD score between the two group on day 0, 3, 7, 14. Compared with the conventional group, INR, APTT, and TBIL in the FFP transfusion group significantly increased, while PaO2/FiO2 significantly decreased within 14 days. In conclusion, FFP transfusion had no beneficial effect on the 30-day, 90-day, in-hospital mortality, was associated with prolonged the LOS ICU and LOS hospital, and the increased risk of liver failure, kidney failure, coagulation failure, respiratory failure and circulatory failure events. However, large, multi-center, randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies and external validation are still needed to verify the efficacy of FFP transfusion in the future.

Clinical Guideline on Perioperative Management of Patients with Advanced Chronic Liver Disease

(1) Background: Patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) are living longer with more comorbidities because of improved medical and surgical management. However, patients with ACLD are at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality; (2) Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature to support a narrative clinical guideline about the assessment of mortality risk and management of perioperative morbidity in patients with ACLD undergoing surgical procedures; (3) Results: Slight data exist to guide the perioperative management of patients with ACLD, and most recommendations are based on case series and expert opinion. The severity of liver dysfunction, portal hypertension, cardiopulmonary and renal comorbidities, and complexity of surgery and type (elective versus emergent) are predictors of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Expert multidisciplinary teams are necessary to evaluate and manage ACLD before, during, and after surgical procedures; (4) Conclusions: This clinical practice document updates the available data and recommendations to optimize the management of patients with advanced chronic liver disease who undergo surgical procedures.

Individualized Management of Coagulopathy in Patients with End-Stage Liver Disease

Over the last decades, individualized approaches and a better understanding of coagulopathy complexity in end-stage liver disease (ESLD) patients has evolved. The risk of both thrombosis and bleeding during minimally invasive interventions or surgery is associated with a worse outcome in this patient population. Despite deranged quantitative and qualitative coagulation laboratory parameters, prophylactic coagulation management is unnecessary for patients who do not bleed. Transfusion of red blood cells (RBCs) and blood products carries independent risks for morbidity and mortality, including modulation of the immune system with increased risk for nosocomial infections. Optimal coagulation management in these complex patients should be based on the analysis of standard coagulation tests (SCTs) and viscoelastic tests (VETs). VETs represent an individualized approach to patients and can provide information about coagulation dynamics in a concise period of time. This narrative review will deliver the pathophysiology of deranged hemostasis in ESLD, explore the difficulties of evaluating the coagulopathies in liver disease patients, and examine the use of VET assays and management of coagulopathy using coagulation factors. Methods: A selective literature search with PubMed as the central database was performed with the following.

Platelets as a Gauge of Liver Disease Kinetics?

A multitude of laboratory and clinical interferences influence the utility of platelet-based diagnostic indices, including immature platelet fraction, in longitudinal monitoring and prognostication of patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). The complex yet highly regulated molecular basis of platelet production and clearance kinetics becomes dysregulated in liver pathogenesis. These underlying molecular mechanisms, including premature platelet clearance and bone marrow suppression in parallel with the progressive (e.g., treatment-naïve) or regressive (e.g., on-treatment and off-treatment) disease courses, involved in CLDs, may further confound the changes in platelet-liver correlations over time. Platelet count and function are commonly and secondarily altered in vivo in CLDs. However, the precise characterization of platelet functions during cirrhosis, including in vitro platelet aggregation, has proven challenging due to interferences such as thrombocytopenia. A flow cytometric approach may help monitor the unstably rebalanced hyper- and hypoaggregable states in patients with cirrhosis at risk of hyperaggregable, prothrombotic, or bleeding events. Studies have attempted to stratify patients with cirrhosis by substages and prognosis through the use of novel indices such as the ratio of in vitro endogenous platelet aggregation to platelet count. This review attempts to highlight clinical and laboratory precautions in the context of platelet-assisted CLD monitoring.

Management of Decompensated Cirrhosis in the Surgical ICU: an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee Clinical Consensus Document

Management of decompensated cirrhosis (DC) can be challenging for the surgical intensivist. Management of DC is often complicated by ascites, coagulopathy, hepatic encephalopathy, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatorenal syndrome, and difficulty assessing volume status. This Clinical Consensus Document created by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Critical Care Committee reviews practical clinical questions about the critical care management of patients with DC to facilitate best practices by the bedside provider.