Copyright
©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Gastroenterol. Sep 7, 2023; 29(33): 4962-4974
Published online Sep 7, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i33.4962
Published online Sep 7, 2023. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i33.4962
Table 1 Characteristics of studies on non-cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis treated with direct oral anticoagulants
Study | Population | Outcomes | Adverse events | Ref. |
Prospective | Non-cirrhotic, atypical sites (including PVT); Riva and Api for PVT (n = 16) vs enoxa for PVT (n = 13) | Riva and Apixaban are effective and safe in patients with venous thrombosis of atypical locations | No major difference in bleeding rate | Janczak et al[40], 2018 |
Retrospective | Non-malignant PVT, both cirrhotic and non-cirrhotic; Edo (n = 4), Api (n = 3), Riva (n = 2), Dabi (n = 1) vs traditional AC (n = 12), no AC (n = 39) | Favourable outcomes with DOACs with regression/resolution of thrombus in 20% of patients and stability or nonprogression in 80% | One bleeding episode in DOACs | Scheiner et al[41], 2018 |
Retrospective | Non-cirrhotic PVT; Riva (n = 65), Api (n = 20), Dabi (n = 8) vs Warf (n = 108), Enoxa (n = 70), Fondap (n = 2) | Resolution rate: Dabi (75%), Api (65%), Riva (65%), Enoxa (57%), Warf (31%); Recanalization rates are higher in DOACs compared to Warf but similar to Enoxa | Less major bleeding incidence in DOACs | Naymagon et al[42], 2020 |
Retrospective | IBD-associated PVT; DOACs (n = 23) vs Warf (n = 22), Enoxa (n = 13) | Resolution rate: DOACs (96%), Warf (55%); DOACs group needed a shorter course of anticoagulation (median 3.9 vs 8.5) | N/A | Naymagon et al[43] 2021 |
Retrospective | Intraabdominal surgery < 3 mo prior to PVT diagnosis; DOACs (n = 35) vs Warf (n = 31), Enoxa (n = 29), no AC (n = 12) | Complete resolution rate: DOACs (77%), Enoxa (69%), Warf (45%), no AC (17%) | N/A | Naymagon et al[44], 2021 |
Retrospective | PVT with/without cirrhosis; DOACs (n = 13; 8 non-cirrhotic) vs Warf (n = 20; 15 non cirrotic) | Treatment failure: DOACs (n = 0); Warf (n = 4) | Major bleedings: DOACs: n=0; VKA: n=1 | Ilcewicz et al[45], 2021 |
Prospective | SVT without cirrhosis; Riva 15 BID for 3 wk + Riva 20 mg OD for 3 mo (n = 100) | Recanalization > 80% at 3 mo (47% complete) | 2 major bleeding; 2 SVT recurrence | Ageno et al[46], 2022 |
Table 2 Comparison of main clinical practice guidelines for the management of portal vein thrombosis in non-cirrhotic patients
EASL 2016[30] | AASLD 2020[38] | ACG 2020[52] | Baveno VII 2022[35] | |
Classification | Acute; Chronic | Recent: < 6 mo; Chronic: > 6 mo | Acute; Chronic | Recent: < 6 mo; Chronic: > 6 mo |
Treatment | Acute: AC; Chronic: Not specified | Recent PVT: AC; Chronic complete PVT or cavernous transformation: No benefit from AC | Acute PVT: AC; Chronic: thrombophilia, progression of thrombus into mesenteric veins, current or previous evidence of bowel ischemia | Recent PVT: At diagnosis; Chronic PVT: After prophylaxis for portal hypertensive bleeding in high-risk varices |
Choice of anticoagulation | LMWH, VKA | LMWH, VKA, DOACs | UFH, LMWH for initiation; LMWH or VKA for maintenance (DOACs absorption limited in the presence of intestinal oedema) | LMWH, VKA, DOACs |
Duration of treatment | At least 6 mo in presence of transient risk factor; long term for persistent risk factor or in case of chronic PVT with history of intestinal ischemia or recurrent thrombosis | AC for 3 mo | At least 6 mo for acute without thrombophilia; long term with thrombophilia | Recent PVT: At least 6 mo; Chronic: Long term for patient with permanent prothrombotic state |
Notes | EVL can be performed safely without withdrawing VKA |
Table 3 Characteristics of studies on cirrhotic patients with portal vein thrombosis treated with direct oral anticoagulants
Study | Population | Aim of study | Doses and duration | Outcomes | Adverse events | Ref. |
Retrospective | Cirrhotic, CP A/B/C; any indication (incl. PVT); subgroup with PVT: Riva or Api (n = 4) vs Enoxa or VKA (n = 3) | Efficacy and safety of DOACs vs traditional AC in cirrhosis | Riva 15 mg OD +/- 20 mg OD load; Api 5 mg BID +/- 10 mg BID load 10.6 mo (mean) | Recurrent thrombosis: DOACs (n = 1); Trad AC (n = 1) | Total bleeding events were similar in the two groups (with lesser major bleeding in the DOACs group) | Hum et al[87], 2017 |
Retrospective | Cirrhotic, CP A/BAny indication (incl. PVT); subgroup with PVT: Riva or Api (n = 12) vs LMWH or Warf (n = 6) | Compare the bleeding rates in cirrhotic patients | Riva 20 mg OD; Api 5 mg BID 10.6 mo (mean) | No statistical difference between therapeutic and prophylactic dosing between groups | Similar rates of major and minor bleeding in the two groups | Intagliata et al[89], 2016 |
Retrospective | Both cirrhotic and non, CP A/B; any indication (incl. PVT); subgroup with cirrhosis and PVT: Riva, Api or Dabi (n = 22) | Indication for starting or switching to DOACs and report short-term efficacy and safety | Cirrhotic: Different doses 9.6 mo (mean) | Cirrhotic: recurrent PVT (n = 1, 4.5%) | Cirrhotic group any indication: Major bleeding (n = 1), minor bleeding (n = 4) | De Gottardi et al[88], 2017 |
Retrospective | Both cirrhotic and non, CP A/B/C; non-malignant PVT; Edo (n = 4), Api (n = 3), Riva (n = 2), Dabi (n = 1) vs traditional AC (n = 12), no AC (n = 39) | Efficacy and safety of AC in non-malignant PVT | Edo 30/60 mg OD, Api 5 mg BID, Riva 10 mg OD, Dabi 110 mg BID 9.2 mo (median) | Favourable outcomes with DOACs: Regression/resolution 20%; stability/non-progression 80% | Portal hypertensive gastropathy bleeding | Scheiner et al[41], 2018 |
Retrospective | Cirrhotic, CP A/B; non-malignant PVT; Edo (n = 20) vs Warf (n = 30) (following 2 wk Danaparoid) | Compare the efficacy and safety of Edo and Warf for treatment of chronic PVT in cirrhotic patients | Edo 60 mg OD, (if CrCl > 50; n = 4) or Edo 30 mg OD (if CrCl < 50; n = 16) 6 mo (max) | Edo group had more complete resolution and less PVT progression than Warf group | Major GI bleeding: Edo (n = 3; 7%); Warf (n = 2; 15%) | Nagaoki et al[91], 2018 |
Prospective | Cirrhotic, CP A; chronic PTV; Riva (n = 26), Dabi (n = 14) vs no AC (n = 40) | Compare the efficacy and safety of DOACs and no AC in chronic PVT in cirrhotic patients | Riva 20 mg OD; Dabi 150 mg BID; 6 mo (max) | Recanalization rate with DOACs 28.2% (statistically higher) and improvement of liver function | No statistically significant difference between the DOACs and the control group in bleeding events | Ai et al[92], 2020 |
Prospective | Cirrhotic, CP A/B/C; non-malignant PVT; TIPS + AC (n = 197, 18 Riva) vs AC only (n = 63, 4 Riva) vs TIPS only (n = 88) vs nothing (n = 48) | Compare the management using a wait-and-see strategy, AC, and TIPS to treat PVT in cirrhosis | Riva 10 mg OD; 21.0 mo (median) | Recanalization: 0% with Riva only (all with PVT and SMV thrombosis), 100% with Riva + TIPS | Major bleeding events: AC only (n = 14); TIPS+AC (n = 30) | Lv et al[93], 2021 |
- Citation: Monaco G, Bucherini L, Stefanini B, Piscaglia F, Foschi FG, Ielasi L. Direct oral anticoagulants for the treatment of splanchnic vein thrombosis: A state of art. World J Gastroenterol 2023; 29(33): 4962-4974
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v29/i33/4962.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v29.i33.4962