Publication

Clinical Cirrhosis Dilemmas: Survey of Practice from the 7th International Coagulation in Liver Disease Conference

Stine, J. G., Intagliata, N. M., Shah, N. L., Lisman, T., Violi, F., Caldwell, S. H. & Argo, C. K., May-2020, In : Digestive Diseases and Sciences. 65, 5, p. 1334-1339 6 p.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Copy link to clipboard

Documents

  • Clinical Cirrhosis Dilemmas Survey of Practice from the 7th

    Final publisher's version, 517 KB, PDF document

    Request copy

DOI

  • Jonathan G. Stine
  • Nicolas M. Intagliata
  • Neeral L. Shah
  • Ton Lisman
  • Francesco Violi
  • Stephen H. Caldwell
  • Curtis K. Argo

Introduction and Aim Hemostatic disorders in chronic liver disease and cirrhosis show continued expansion of research efforts. However, clinical decision making is often practiced on an individual patient level as consensus guidelines are lacking. We aimed to better assess individual day-to-day clinical practice through gauging clinicians' responses to common clinical scenarios. Materials and Methods A series of ten clinical scenarios (seven procedural coagulation and three thrombosis management) were posed to conference attendees utilizing real-time polling software (Poll Everywhere). Responses were binomial and were submitted as "Agree" or "Disagree." Results were displayed real time following a standardized response period and an open-forum discussion ensued between conference faculty and attendees following response submission. Results Twenty conference attendees participated in the clinical scenario plenary session. In general, agreement rates were high. All but one of the ten clinical scenarios had >= 70% agreement. Agreement was based both on procedural risk, with greatest agreement seen for low-risk procedures (80-93%), and on peri-procedural coagulation parameters of platelet count and fibrinogen level where > 50,000 mu/L and 120 mg/dL were the most agreed upon thresholds, respectively. 75-95% agreement was reached when surveying the need for anticoagulation for mesenteric vein thrombosis in liver transplant candidates; slightly less (71%) agreement was found when deciding to proceed with anticoagulation in non-liver transplant candidates with mesenteric vein thrombosis. Conclusions While large-scale, methodologically rigorous randomized controlled trials are lacking to guide clinical decision making in patients with coagulation disorders and chronic liver disease, consensus expert opinion regarding mitigating peri-procedural bleeding risk and treatment of thrombosis appears consistent and strong.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1334-1339
Number of pages6
JournalDigestive Diseases and Sciences
Volume65
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - May-2020

    Keywords

  • Hepatology, Liver transplantation, Venous thromboembolism, Procedures, Bleeding risk, PORTAL-VEIN THROMBOSIS, COAGULOPATHY, TRANSPLANTATION, MANAGEMENT, FIBRINOGEN, RISK

ID: 127067298