-
European Journal of Internal Medicine Oct 2022Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) may be associated with negative outcomes in patients with liver cirrhosis. However, the prevalence and incidence of PVT in liver cirrhosis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
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.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Ascites; Cross-Sectional Studies; Humans; Liver Cirrhosis; Portal Vein; Prospective Studies; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 35688747
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2022.05.032 -
Immunity, Inflammation and Disease Mar 2023Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Since publishing successful clinical trial results of mRNA coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in December 2020, multiple reports have arisen about cardiovascular complications following the mRNA vaccination. This study provides an in-depth account of various cardiovascular adverse events reported after the mRNA vaccines' first or second dose including pericarditis/myopericarditis, myocarditis, hypotension, hypertension, arrhythmia, cardiogenic shock, stroke, myocardial infarction/STEMI, intracranial hemorrhage, thrombosis (deep vein thrombosis, cerebral venous thrombosis, arterial or venous thrombotic events, portal vein thrombosis, coronary thrombosis, microvascular small bowel thrombosis), and pulmonary embolism.
METHODS
A systematic review of original studies reporting confirmed cardiovascular manifestations post-mRNA COVID-19 vaccination was performed. Following the PRISMA guidelines, electronic databases (PubMed, PMC NCBI, and Cochrane Library) were searched until January 2022. Baseline characteristics of patients and disease outcomes were extracted from relevant studies.
RESULTS
A total of 81 articles analyzed confirmed cardiovascular complications post-COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in 17,636 individuals and reported 284 deaths with any mRNA vaccine. Of 17,636 cardiovascular events with any mRNA vaccine, 17,192 were observed with the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine, 444 events with mRNA-1273 (Moderna). Thrombosis was frequently reported with any mRNA vaccine (n = 13,936), followed by stroke (n = 758), myocarditis (n = 511), myocardial infarction (n = 377), pulmonary embolism (n = 301), and arrhythmia (n = 254). Stratifying the results by vaccine type showed that thrombosis (80.8%) was common in the BNT162b2 cohort, while stroke (39.9%) was common with mRNA-1273 for any dose. The time between the vaccination dosage and the first symptom onset averaged 5.6 and 4.8 days with the mRNA-1273 vaccine and BNT162b2, respectively. The mRNA-1273 cohort reported 56 deaths compared to the 228 with BNT162b2, while the rest were discharged or transferred to the ICU.
CONCLUSION
Available literature includes more studies with the BNT162b2 vaccine than mRNA-1273. Future studies must report mortality and adverse cardiovascular events by vaccine types.
Topics: Humans; 2019-nCoV Vaccine mRNA-1273; BNT162 Vaccine; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Myocardial Infarction; Myocarditis; Pulmonary Embolism; Stroke; Thrombocytopenia; Thrombosis
PubMed: 36988252
DOI: 10.1002/iid3.807 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022Patients with kidney failure require vascular access to receive maintenance haemodialysis (HD), which can be achieved by an arteriovenous fistula or a central venous... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patients with kidney failure require vascular access to receive maintenance haemodialysis (HD), which can be achieved by an arteriovenous fistula or a central venous catheter (CVC). CVC use is related to frequent complications such as venous stenosis and infection. Venous stenosis occurs mainly due to trauma caused by the entrance of the catheter into the venous lumen and repeated contact with the vein wall. A biofilm, a colony of irreversible adherent and self-sufficient micro-organisms embedded in a self-produced matrix of exopolysaccharides, is associated with the development of infections in patients with indwelling catheters. Despite its clinical relevance, the treatment of catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) in patients receiving maintenance HD remains controversial, especially regarding catheter management. Antibiotic lock solutions may sterilise the catheter, treat the infection and prevent unnecessary catheter procedures. However, such treatment may also lead to antibiotic resistance or even clinical worsening in certain more virulent pathogens. Catheter removal and delayed replacement may remove the source of infection, improving infectious outcomes, but this approach may also increase vascular access stenosis, thrombosis or both, or even central vein access failure. Catheter guidewire exchange attempts to remove the source of infection while maintaining access to the same vein and, therefore, may improve clinical outcomes and preserve central veins for future access.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of different interventions for CRBSI treatment in patients receiving maintenance HD through a permanent CVC, such as systemic antibiotics alone or systemic antibiotics combined with either lock solutions or catheter guidewire exchange or catheter replacement.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 21 December 2021 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register were identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating the management of CRBSI in permanent CVCs in people receiving maintenance HD.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed their risk of bias, and performed data extraction. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) or hazard ratios (HR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified two RCTs and one quasi-RCT that enrolled 760 participants addressing the treatment of CRBSIs in people (children and adults) receiving maintenance HD through CVC. No two studies compared the same interventions. The quasi-RCT compared two different lock solutions (tissue plasminogen activator (TPA) and heparin) with concurrent systemic antibiotics. One RCT compared systemic antibiotics alone and in association with an ethanol lock solution, and the other compared systemic antibiotics with different catheter management strategies (guidewire exchange versus removal and replacement). The overall certainty of the evidence was downgraded due to the small number of participants, high risk of bias in many domains, especially randomisation, allocation, and other sources of bias, and missing outcome data. It is uncertain whether an ethanol lock solution used with concurrent systemic antibiotics improved CRBSI eradication compared to systemic antibiotics alone (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.23) because the certainty of this evidence is very low. There were no reported differences between the effects of TPA and heparin lock solutions on cure rates (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.15) or between catheter guidewire exchange versus catheter removal with delayed replacement, expressed as catheter infection-free survival (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.79). To date, no results are available comparing other interventions. Outcomes such as venous stenosis and/or thrombosis, antibiotic resistance, death, and adverse events were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Currently, there is no available high certainty evidence to support one treatment over another for CRBSIs. The benefit of using ethanol lock treatment in combination with systemic antibiotics compared to systemic antibiotics alone for CRBSIs in patients receiving maintenance HD remains uncertain due to the very low certainty of the evidence. Hence, further RCTs to identify the benefits and harms of CRBSI treatment options are needed. Future studies should unify CRBSI and cure definitions and improve methodological design.
Topics: Adult; Catheter-Related Infections; Central Venous Catheters; Child; Heparin; Humans; Renal Dialysis; Sepsis
PubMed: 35363884
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013554.pub2 -
Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine Sep 2019Several options have been proposed for the treatment of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (cEHPSS) in dogs, but formal comparisons among different treatment... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Several options have been proposed for the treatment of congenital extrahepatic portosystemic shunts (cEHPSS) in dogs, but formal comparisons among different treatment options are currently unavailable. A previous evidence-based review (2012) found low quality of evidence for papers assessing the treatment of cEHPSS in dogs.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the quality of evidence available in the treatment of cEHPSS, summarize the current state of knowledge with respect to outcome after cEHPSS management, and compare different treatment techniques.
ANIMALS
Not used.
METHODS
A bibliographic search was performed without date or language restrictions. Studies were assessed for quality of evidence (study design, study group sizes, subject enrollment quality, and overall risk of bias) and outcome measures reported (perioperative outcome, clinical outcome, and surgical or interventional outcome), all reported with 95% confidence intervals. A network meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS
Forty-eight studies were included. Six retrospective studies (grade 4b) compared 2 techniques and 7 were abstracts (grade 5). The quality of evidence was low and risk of bias high. Regarding surgical outcome, statistically significant superiority of ameroid constrictor over thin film band was observed (P = .003). No other comparisons were statistically significant.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE
The evidence base of choice of treatment of cEHPSS in dogs remains weak despite recent publications on the subject. Ameroid is superior to thin film band in causing EHPSS closure. Blinded randomized studies comparing different treatment modalities, which routinely include postoperative imaging to assess cEHPSS closure and acquired portosystemic shunt development are essential.
Topics: Animals; Caseins; Dog Diseases; Dogs; Hydrogels; Ligation; Portal System; Portal Vein; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31471995
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.15607 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2023Liver transplantation is the only chance of cure for people with end-stage liver disease and some people with advanced liver cancers or acute liver failure. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Liver transplantation is the only chance of cure for people with end-stage liver disease and some people with advanced liver cancers or acute liver failure. The increasing prevalence of these conditions drives demand and necessitates the increasing use of donated livers which have traditionally been considered suboptimal. Several novel machine perfusion preservation technologies have been developed, which attempt to ameliorate some of the deleterious effects of ischaemia reperfusion injury. Machine perfusion technology aims to improve organ quality, thereby improving outcomes in recipients of suboptimal livers when compared to traditional static cold storage (SCS; ice box).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of different methods of machine perfusion (including hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HOPE), normothermic machine perfusion (NMP), controlled oxygenated rewarming, and normothermic regional perfusion) versus each other or versus static cold storage (SCS) in people undergoing liver transplantation.
SEARCH METHODS
We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 10 January 2023.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised clinical trials which compared different methods of machine perfusion, either with each other or with SCS. Studies comparing HOPE via both hepatic artery and portal vein, or via portal vein only, were grouped. The protocol detailed that we also planned to include quasi-randomised studies to assess treatment harms.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. overall participant survival, 2. quality of life, and 3. serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were 4. graft survival, 5. ischaemic biliary complications, 6. primary non-function of the graft, 7. early allograft function, 8. non-serious adverse events, 9. transplant utilisation, and 10. transaminase release during the first week post-transplant. We assessed bias using Cochrane's RoB 2 tool and used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven randomised trials (1024 transplant recipients from 1301 randomised/included livers). All trials were parallel two-group trials; four compared HOPE versus SCS, and three compared NMP versus SCS. No trials used normothermic regional perfusion. When compared with SCS, it was uncertain whether overall participant survival was improved with either HOPE (hazard ratio (HR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 1.98; P = 0.81, I = 0%; 4 trials, 482 recipients; low-certainty evidence due to imprecision because of low number of events) or NMP (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.31 to 3.80; P = 0.90; 1 trial, 222 recipients; very low-certainty evidence due to imprecision and risk of bias). No trials reported quality of life. When compared with SCS alone, HOPE was associated with improvement in the following clinically relevant outcomes: graft survival (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.87; P = 0.02, I = 0%; 4 trials, 482 recipients; high-certainty evidence), serious adverse events in extended criteria DBD liver transplants (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.91; P = 0.03, I = 0%; 2 trials, 156 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and clinically significant ischaemic cholangiopathy in recipients of DCD livers (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.92; P = 0.03; 1 trial, 156 recipients; high-certainty evidence). In contrast, NMP was not associated with improvement in any of these clinically relevant outcomes. NMP was associated with improved utilisation compared with SCS (one trial found a 50% lower rate of organ discard; P = 0.008), but the reasons underlying this effect are unknown. We identified 11 ongoing studies investigating machine perfusion technologies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In situations where the decision has been made to transplant a liver donated after circulatory death or donated following brain death, end-ischaemic HOPE will provide superior clinically relevant outcomes compared with SCS alone. Specifically, graft survival is improved (high-certainty evidence), serious adverse events are reduced (moderate-certainty evidence), and in donors after circulatory death, clinically relevant ischaemic biliary complications are reduced (high-certainty evidence). There is no good evidence that NMP has the same benefits over SCS in terms of these clinically relevant outcomes. NMP does appear to improve utilisation of grafts that would otherwise be discarded with SCS; however, the reasons for this, and whether this effect is specific to NMP, is not clear. Further studies into NMP viability criteria and utilisation, as well as head-to-head trials with other perfusion technologies are needed. In the setting of donation following circulatory death transplantation, further trials are needed to assess the effect of these ex situ machine perfusion methods against, or in combination with, normothermic regional perfusion.
Topics: Humans; Liver Transplantation; Quality of Life; Perfusion; End Stage Liver Disease
PubMed: 37698189
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014685.pub2 -
Journal of Gastroenterology and... Oct 2023Progression of liver disease in cirrhosis is associated with an increased incidence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhosis. However, evidence suggests that... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Progression of liver disease in cirrhosis is associated with an increased incidence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in cirrhosis. However, evidence suggests that spontaneous recanalization of PVT may occur even without anti-thrombotic therapy. Thus, the present meta-analysis was conducted to study the natural history of PVT in cirrhosis, facilitating decisions regarding anticoagulation.
METHODS
Three electronic databases were searched from 2000 to August 2022 for studies reporting the outcome of PVT in cirrhotics without anticoagulation. The pooled proportions with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effect model.
RESULTS
A total of 26 studies (n = 1441) were included in the final analysis. Progression of PVT on follow-up was seen in 22.2% (95% CI 16.1-28.4), while 77.7% (95% CI 71.6-83.9) remained non-progressive (improved or stable). The most common outcome was a stable PVT with a pooled event rate of 44.6% (95% CI 34.4-54.7). The pooled rates of regression and complete recanalization of PVT in cirrhotics were 29.3% (95% CI 20.9-37.7) and 10.4% (95% CI 5.0-15.8), respectively. On follow-up after improvement, pooled recurrence rate of PVT was 24.0% (95% CI 14.7-33.4). MELD score, and presence of ascites had a negative association, while a longer follow-up duration had positive association with PVT regression.
CONCLUSION
Approximately 25% of the cases of PVT in cirrhosis are progressive, 30% cases improve, and 45% remain stable. Future studies are needed to analyze the predictors of spontaneous regression.
Topics: Humans; Portal Vein; Anticoagulants; Venous Thrombosis; Liver Cirrhosis; Thrombosis
PubMed: 37354011
DOI: 10.1111/jgh.16263 -
Asian Journal of Surgery Aug 2023Several studies have proven that COVID-19 is linked to a higher incidence of different thrombotic events. Thrombosis of the portal vein can result in portal hypertension... (Review)
Review
Several studies have proven that COVID-19 is linked to a higher incidence of different thrombotic events. Thrombosis of the portal vein can result in portal hypertension and can extend to the mesenteric vein resulting in intestinal ischemia. A search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for relevant studies revealed an association between PVT and COVID-19. This review is structured according to PRISMA guidelines. Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-nine case studies/series and four cohort/cross-sectional studies were included. Age at diagnosis was lower when compared to PVT due to cirrhosis. In cohort/cross-sectional studies, males comprised 54.83% of subjects, whereas in case reports/series, males comprised 62.1%. Obesity, asthma, hypertension, and diabetes were the most common comorbidities identified. The majority of the thrombotic events occurred within two weeks. The treatment aimed to prevent thrombus progression and improve recanalization. According to the evidence, early intervention prevents the poor prognosis of intestinal ischemia and its propagation.
Topics: Male; Humans; Female; Portal Vein; Cross-Sectional Studies; Anticoagulants; COVID-19; Venous Thrombosis; Thrombosis; Liver Cirrhosis; Ischemia
PubMed: 36435627
DOI: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2022.11.002 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Aug 2022Suppurative portal vein thrombosis (pylephlebitis) is an uncommon condition usually associated with an intra-abdominal infection or inflammatory process. In this study,... (Review)
Review
Suppurative portal vein thrombosis (pylephlebitis) is an uncommon condition usually associated with an intra-abdominal infection or inflammatory process. In this study, we aimed to synthesize data on previously published cases according to the PRISMA guidelines. A total of 103 patients were included. Patients were more commonly male (71.8%) and had a mean age of 49 years. The most common infection associated with pylephlebitis was diverticulitis ( = 29, 28.2%), and was the most isolated pathogen ( = 21, 20.4%). Blood cultures were positive in 64 cases (62.1%). The most common site of thrombosis was the main portal vein (PV) in 59 patients (57.3%), followed by the superior mesenteric vein (SMV) in 40 patients (38.8%) and the right branch of the PV in 30 patients (29.1%). Sepsis developed in 60 patients (58.3%). The mortality rate in our review was 8.7%, and independent risk factors for mortality were the presence of pertinent comorbidities (OR 5.5, = 0.02), positive blood cultures (OR 2.2, = 0.02), and sepsis (OR 17.2, = 0.049).
PubMed: 36078922
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11174992 -
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis :... Sep 2023The clinical characteristics of splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) in pediatric patients and its optimal treatment strategies are unknown. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The clinical characteristics of splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT) in pediatric patients and its optimal treatment strategies are unknown.
OBJECTIVES
This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of anticoagulant therapy for pediatric SVT.
METHODS
MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched up to December 2021. We included observational and interventional studies that enrolled pediatric patients with SVT and reported anticoagulant treatment and outcomes, including rates of vessel recanalization, SVT extension, venous thromboembolism (VTE) recurrence, major bleeding, and mortality. Pooled proportions of vessel recanalization were calculated with their 95% CI.
RESULTS
A total of 506 pediatric patients (aged 0-18 years) across 17 observational studies were included. The majority of patients had portal vein thrombosis (n = 308, 60.8%) or Budd-Chiari syndrome (n = 175, 34.6%). Most events were triggered by transient provoking factors. Anticoagulation (heparins and vitamin K antagonists) was prescribed in 217 (42.9%) patients, and 148 (29.2%) patients underwent vascular interventions. The overall pooled proportions of vessel recanalization were 55.3% (95% CI, 34.1%-74.7%; I = 74.0%) among anticoagulated patients and 29.4% (95% CI, 2.6%-86.6%; I = 49.0%) among non-anticoagulated patients. SVT extension, major bleeding, VTE recurrence, and mortality rates were 8.9%, 3.8%, 3.5%, and 10.0%, respectively, in anticoagulated patients and 2.8%, 1.4%, 0%, and 50.3%, respectively, in non-anticoagulated patients.
CONCLUSION
In pediatric SVT, anticoagulation appears to be associated with moderate recanalization rates and a low risk of major bleeding. VTE recurrence is low and comparable to that reported in pediatric patients with other types of provoked VTE.
Topics: Humans; Child; Anticoagulants; Venous Thromboembolism; Venous Thrombosis; Hemorrhage; Blood Coagulation; Splanchnic Circulation
PubMed: 37225019
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtha.2023.05.014 -
PloS One 2023The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the anticoagulants for the prevention of portal vein system thrombosis (PVST) in patients with cirrhosis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
AIM
The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the anticoagulants for the prevention of portal vein system thrombosis (PVST) in patients with cirrhosis after splenectomy and explore the optimal time of anticoagulant administration.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase and China Biology Medicine disc (CBM)databases, so as to screen out studies comparing the prognoses between cirrhotic post-splenectomy patients treated with and without anticoagulants. The parameters that were analyzed included the incidence of PVST and postoperative bleeding.
RESULTS
With a total of 592 subjects, we included 8 studies (6 observational and 2 randomized trials) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. We found that the incidence of PVST was significantly lower in the anticoagulation group during the first 6 months of anticoagulant administration. And the largest difference in the incidence of PVST between the anticoagulation and control groups was observed at 3 months (odds ratio 0.17(0.11~0.27); P = 0.767; I2 = 0.0%) and 6 months (OR = 0.21(0.11~0.40); P = 0.714; I2 = 0.0%) postoperatively. The incidence of bleeding was not significantly higher in the anticoagulation group (odds ratio 0.71 (0.30~1.71); P = 0.580; I2 = 0.0%).
CONCLUSION
Low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and warfarin can decrease the incidence of PVST in post-splenectomy cirrhotic patients without an increased risk of bleeding. And the optimal use time of warfarin is 6 months after splenectomy.
Topics: Humans; Warfarin; Portal Vein; Heparin, Low-Molecular-Weight; Splenectomy; Postoperative Complications; Venous Thrombosis; Anticoagulants; Liver Cirrhosis
PubMed: 37582105
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290164