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.

Poor response to rivaroxaban in nephrotic syndrome with acute deep vein thrombosis: A case report.

RATIONALE: Hypercoagulability can lead to thromboembolic events that are a life-threatening complication of nephrotic syndrome (NS). Conventional anticoagulants are first-line treatment in the presence of demonstrated thrombosis in NS. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have provided useful alternatives for the prevention and treatment of thromboembolic events. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 59-year-old male developed lower limbs deep vein thrombosis (DVT) during the early course of NS but presented poor response to oral therapeutic doses of rivaroxaban. The decision was made to switch from rivaroxaban to heparin and subsequently bridged to warfarin. The patient presented significant clinical symptom improvement. DIAGNOSIS: NS with Lower limbs DVT. INTERVENTIONS: Rivaroxaban was discontinued and switch to heparin and subsequently bridged to warfarin. OUTCOMES: Venography result of both lower limb vein showed the venous wall was smooth without obvious stenosis or obstruction. Edema of the patient's lower limbs gradually improved and disappeared. LESSONS: The existing published data on the application of DOACs in NS are limited. DOACs have an immediate anticoagulant effect and have demonstrated safety and efficacy and required no routine monitoring, however, application of these agents in NS likely requires further investigation before widespread adoption.