Abstract

BACKGROUND The antifibrinolytic drug tranexamic acid (TXA) improves survival in adults with traumatic hemorrhage; however, the drug has not been evaluated in a trial in injured children. We evaluated the feasibility of a large-scale trial evaluating the effects of TXA in children with severe hemorrhagic injuries. METHODS Severely injured children (0 up to 18(th) birthday) were randomized into a double-blind randomized trial of 1) TXA 15 mg/kg bolus dose, followed by 2 mg/kg/hr infusion over 8 hours, 2) TXA 30 mg/kg bolus dose, followed by 4 mg/kg/hr infusion over 8 hours, or 3) normal saline placebo bolus and infusion. The trial was conducted at 4 pediatric Level I trauma centers in the United States between June 2018 and March 2020. We enrolled patients under federal exception from informed consent (EFIC) procedures when parents were unable to provide informed consent. Feasibility outcomes included the rate of enrollment, adherence to intervention arms, and ability to measure the primary clinical outcome. Clinical outcomes included global functioning (primary), working memory, total amount of blood products transfused, intracranial hemorrhage progression, and adverse events. The target enrollment rate was at least 1.25 patients per site per month. RESULTS A total of 31 patients were randomized with a mean age of 10.7 years (standard deviation [SD] 5.0 years) and 22 (71%) patients were male. The mean time from injury to randomization was 2.4 hours (SD 0.6 hours). Sixteen (52%) patients had isolated brain injuries and 15 (48%) patients had isolated torso injuries. The enrollment rate using EFIC was 1.34 patients per site per month. All eligible enrolled patients received study intervention (9 patients TXA 15 mg/kg bolus dose, 10 patients TXA 30 mg/kg bolus dose, and 12 patients placebo) and had the primary outcome measured. No statistically significant differences in any of the clinical outcomes were identified. CONCLUSION Based on enrollment rate, protocol adherence, and measurement of the primary outcome in this pilot trial, we confirmed the feasibility of conducting a large-scale, randomized trial evaluating the efficacy of TXA in severely injured children with hemorrhagic brain and/or torso injuries using EFIC.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists states that data is insufficient to recommend Tranexamic acid (TXA) prophylaxis for postpartum hemorrhage. OBJECTIVE This study's objective was to evaluate if prophylactic TXA reduces calculated blood loss versus placebo in women undergoing elective repeat cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, examining calculated blood loss with prophylactic doses of 1-gram of TXA given before skin incision and after placental delivery and standard uterotonics in women with singleton pregnancies at least 37 weeks' gestation, presenting for their second or third cesarean delivery under neuraxial anesthesia. The primary outcome was calculated blood loss at 24 hours. The calculation was based on the participant's height, weight, and the difference in hematocrit before the start of surgery and 24 hours after delivery. Prespecified secondary outcomes were quantification of maternal coagulation activity during the perioperative course. A sample size of 50 women per group was planned (N=100), based on a meta-analysis of mean reduction in blood loss after TXA. RESULTS 723 women were screened, and 110 women were randomized as follows: 55 to TXA and 55 to placebo. The primary outcome of mean calculated blood for TXA (2274 ± 469 mL) and the placebo group (2407 ± 388 mL), p > 0.05. In the secondary outcomes, D-dimer levels were lower in the TXA group than the placebo group 24 hours after delivery (2.1 ± 1.2 µg/mL versus 4.3 ± 2.4 µg/mL), p < 0.001. CONCLUSIONS Prophylactic tranexamic acid did not decrease mean calculated blood loss. Significantly less participants had calculated blood loss greater than 2000 mL in the tranexamic acid group compared to the placebo group with lower levels of D-dimer at 24 hours.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The renoprotective effects of erythropoietin (EPO) are well-known; however, the optimal timing of EPO administration remains controversial. Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is an independent risk factor for cardiac surgery-associated acute kidney injury (CSA-AKI). We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of EPO on CSA-AKI and RBC transfusion according to the timing of administration. METHODS We searched the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases for randomized controlled trials. The primary outcome was the incidence of CSA-AKI following perioperative EPO administration, and the secondary outcomes were changes in serum creatinine, S-cystatin C, S-neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, length of hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stay, volume of RBC transfusion, and mortality. The subgroup analysis was stratified according to the timing of EPO administration in relation to surgery. RESULTS Eight randomized controlled trials with 610 patients were included in the study. EPO administration significantly decreased the incidence of CSA-AKI (odds ratio: 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-0.85, P = .004; I2 = 52%; P for heterogeneity = .04), intra-operative RBC transfusion (standardized mean difference: -0.30, 95% CI: -0.55 to -0.05, P = .02; I2 = 15%, P for heterogeneity = .31), and hospital length of stay (mean difference: -1.54 days, 95% CI: -2.70 to -0.39, P = .009; I2 = 75%, P for heterogeneity = .001) compared with control groups. Subgroup analyses revealed that pre-operative EPO treatment significantly reduced the incidence of CSA-AKI, intra-operative RBC transfusion, serum creatinine, and length of hospital and ICU stay. CONCLUSION Pre-operative administration of EPO may reduce the incidence of CSA-AKI and RBC transfusion, but not in patients administered EPO during the intra-operative or postoperative period. Therefore, pre-operative EPO treatment can be considered to improve postoperative outcomes by decreasing the length of hospital and ICU stay in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Craniosynostosis surgery is associated with considerable blood loss and need for transfusion. Considering the lower estimated blood volume (EBV) of children compared to adults, excessive blood loss may quickly lead to hypovolemic shock. Therefore, reducing blood loss is important in craniosynostosis surgery. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of aprotinin or tranexamic acid (TXA) in blood loss reduction in these patients. METHODS In the current randomized controlled trial, 90 eligible pediatric patients with craniosynostosis were randomly divided into three groups to receive either aprotinin, TXA, or no intervention. The absolute blood loss and transfusion amount were assessed for all patients both intraoperatively and 2 and 8 hours postoperatively. RESULTS Although crude values of estimated blood loss were not significantly different between groups (p = 0.162), when adjusted to the patient's weight or EBV, the values reached the significance level (p = 0.018), particularly when the aprotinin group was compared to the control group (p = 0.0154). The EBV losses 2 hours and 8 hours postoperatively significantly dropped in the TXA and aprotinin groups compared to the control group (p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Rates of postoperative blood transfusion were significantly higher in the control group (p = 0.024). Hemoglobin and hematocrit 8 hours postoperatively were lower in the control group than in the TXA or aprotinin treatment groups (p < 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively). There were no serious adverse events associated with the interventions in this study. CONCLUSIONS Aprotinin and TXA can reduce blood loss and blood transfusion without serious complications and adverse events in pediatric patients undergoing craniosynostosis surgery.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Passive immunotherapy using hyperimmune intravenous immunoglobulin (hIVIG) to SARS-CoV-2, derived from recovered donors, is a potential rapidly available, specific therapy for an outbreak infection such as SARS-CoV-2. Findings from randomised clinical trials of hIVIG for the treatment of COVID-19 are limited. METHODS In this international randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who had been symptomatic for up to 12 days and did not have acute end-organ failure were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either hIVIG or an equivalent volume of saline as placebo, in addition to remdesivir, when not contraindicated, and other standard clinical care. Randomisation was stratified by site pharmacy; schedules were prepared using a mass-weighted urn design. Infusions were prepared and masked by trial pharmacists; all other investigators, research staff, and trial participants were masked to group allocation. Follow-up was for 28 days. The primary outcome was measured at day 7 by a seven-category ordinal endpoint that considered pulmonary status and extrapulmonary complications and ranged from no limiting symptoms to death. Deaths and adverse events, including organ failure and serious infections, were used to define composite safety outcomes at days 7 and 28. Prespecified subgroup analyses were carried out for efficacy and safety outcomes by duration of symptoms, the presence of anti-spike neutralising antibodies, and other baseline factors. Analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population, which included all randomly assigned participants who met eligibility criteria and received all or part of the assigned study product infusion. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04546581. FINDINGS From Oct 8, 2020, to Feb 10, 2021, 593 participants (n=301 hIVIG, n=292 placebo) were enrolled at 63 sites in 11 countries; 579 patients were included in the mITT analysis. Compared with placebo, the hIVIG group did not have significantly greater odds of a more favourable outcome at day 7; the adjusted OR was 1·06 (95% CI 0·77-1·45; p=0·72). Infusions were well tolerated, although infusion reactions were more common in the hIVIG group (18·6% vs 9·5% for placebo; p=0·002). The percentage with the composite safety outcome at day 7 was similar for the hIVIG (24%) and placebo groups (25%; OR 0·98, 95% CI 0·66-1·46; p=0·91). The ORs for the day 7 ordinal outcome did not vary for subgroups considered, but there was evidence of heterogeneity of the treatment effect for the day 7 composite safety outcome: risk was greater for hIVIG compared with placebo for patients who were antibody positive (OR 2·21, 95% CI 1·14-4·29); for patients who were antibody negative, the OR was 0·51 (0·29-0·90; p(interaction)=0·001). INTERPRETATION When administered with standard of care including remdesivir, SARS-CoV-2 hIVIG did not demonstrate efficacy among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. The safety of hIVIG might vary by the presence of endogenous neutralising antibodies at entry. FUNDING US National Institutes of Health.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Although intravenous tranexamic acid administration (ivTXA) has prevailed in clinical antifibrinolytic treatment, whether it increases thromboembolic risks has remained controversial. As a potent alternative to ivTXA, topical use of TXA (tTXA) has been successfully applied to attenuate blood loss in various surgical fields while minimizing systemic exposure to TXA. This meta-analysis was conducted to gather scientific evidence for tTXA efficacy on reducing postoperative drainage, blood loss, and the length of hospital stay in spine surgeries. OBJECTIVES To examine whether topical use of TXA (tTXA) reduces postoperative drainage output and duration, hidden blood loss, hemoglobin level drop, hospital stay, and adverse event rate, we reviewed both randomized and non-randomized controlled trials that assessed the aforementioned efficacies of tTXA compared with placebo in patients undergoing cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spinal surgeries. METHODS An exhaustive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from January 2000 through March 2020. Measurable outcomes were pooled using Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.0 in a meta-analysis. RESULTS Significantly reduced postoperative drainage output (weighted mean difference [WMD]= - 160.62 ml, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) [- 203.41, - 117.83]; p < .00001) and duration (WMD= - 0.75 days, 95% CI [- 1.09, - 0.40]; p < .0001), perioperative hidden blood loss (WMD= - 91.18ml, 95% CI [- 121.42, - 60.94]; p < .00001), and length of hospital stay (WMD= - 1.32 days, 95% CI [- 1.90, - 0.74]; p < .00001) were observed in tTXA group. Pooled effect for Hb level drop with tTXA vs placebo crossed the equivalent line by a mere 0.05 g/dL, with the predominant distribution of 95% confidence interval (CI) favoring tTXA use. CONCLUSIONS With the most comprehensive literature inclusion up to the present, this meta-analysis suggests that tTXA use in spinal surgeries significantly reduces postoperative drainage, hidden blood loss, and hospital stay duration. The pooled effect also suggests that tTXA appears more effective than placebo in preserving postoperative Hb level, which needs further validation by future studies.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is the most important concern after delivery. Tranexamic acid (TXA), an anti-fibrinolytic agent, has been suggested for prevention and treatment of PPH. OBJECTIVE The purpose of the present study was to find the effects of TXA on the amount of bleeding following vaginal delivery and its adverse effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study was performed as a randomized double blind placebo controlled clinical trial on low risk pregnant women who delivered vaginally. The patients were randomly assigned into two groups. Women in the intervention group received 10 mg/kg infusion of TXA in 100 mL normal saline and the control group received one vial of distilled water (as placebo) in 100 mL normal saline. The primary outcome was amount of bleeding after delivery. The secondary outcomes were decreased in hemoglobin level, need for additional uterotonic agents and need for blood transfusion. All were evaluated 6 h after delivery and compared in the two groups. Participants were followed up to six weeks after delivery for any TXA side effects. RESULTS Two hundred and seven women finished the study. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of demographic data and risk factors for bleeding. Mean blood loss and need to misoprostol was more in the control group (p=.033 and p=.000, respectively). Hemoglobin level was higher in the TXA group 6 h after delivery. None of the subjects needed blood transfusion, uterine balloon tamponade or emergency hysterectomy. Adverse effects were higher in the TXA group, however, there were no side effects between weeks 3 and 6 in both groups. There were no thromboembolic events during six weeks after delivery. CONCLUSIONS Tranexamic acid can reduce the amount of bleeding after vaginal delivery in low risk women without having serious complications. Also, it may decrease the need for additional uterotonic agents. Trial registration number and registry website: IRCT20091023002624N22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) is responsible for nearly one quarter of maternal deaths. A 2017 multicountry trial found that incorporating tranexamic acid (TXA) into the PPH management package was effective in reducing maternal death due to bleeding. OBJECTIVE To systematically review studies assessing the cost-effectiveness of tranexamic acid for PPH treatment. SEARCH STRATEGY Nine databases were searched using variations of keywords 'tranexamic acid', 'postpartum hemorrhage' and 'cost effectiveness'. SELECTION CRITERIA Eligible studies were any type of economic or effectiveness evaluation studies on tranexamic acid for treating women with PPH. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two reviewers independently screened citations and extracted data on cost effectiveness measures. Quality was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list. MAIN RESULTS Four studies were included, of which two were abstracts. Three studies concluded that early administration of TXA was cost-saving or cost-effective. One abstract reported TXA was not cost-effective in the USA unless the probability of death due to hemorrhage is higher. CONCLUSION Available evidence (four studies in three countries) suggests that this life-saving intervention may be below willingness to pay thresholds (cost-effective) or cost saving. Further studies conducted in different populations and settings are needed to inform health policy decision-making to reduce PPH-associated morbidity and mortality.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent which is licensed in the management of haemorrhage associated with trauma. It has been suggested that tranexamic acid may be able to play a role in upper GI bleeding. However, there is currently no recommendation to support this. AIM: The aim of this study was to synthesise available evidence of the effect of TXA on upper GI bleeding. METHODS AND MATERIALS A systematic review was conducted. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for relevant studies. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to determine the risk ratio of primary and secondary outcomes pertaining to the use of TXA in upper GI bleeding. RESULTS A total of 8 studies were included in this systematic review. The total number of patients in all studies was 12994 including 4550 females (35%) and 8444 males (65%). The mean age of participants in 6 of the studies was 59.3; however the mean age for either intervention or placebo group was not reported in two of the studies. All studies reported on the effect of TXA on mortality, and the risk ratio was 0.95; however, with the 95% CI ranging from 0.80 to 1.13, this was not statistically significant. 6 of the studies reported on rebleeding rate, the risk ratio was 0.64, and with a 95% CI ranging from 0.47 to 0.86, this was statistically significant. 3 of the studies reported on the risk of adverse thromboembolic events, and the risk ratio was 0.93; however, the 95% CI extended from 0.62 to 1.39 and so was not statistically significant. 7 of the studies reported on the need for surgery, and the risk ratio was 0.59 and was statistically significant with a 95% CI ranging from 0.38 to 0.94. CONCLUSION In conclusion, the use of TXA in upper GI bleeding appears to have a beneficial effect in terms of decreasing the risk of re-bleeding and decreasing the need for surgery. However, we could not find a statistically significant effect on need for blood transfusions, risk of thromboembolic events, or effect on mortality. Future randomised controlled trials may elucidate these outcomes.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Tranexamic acid safely reduces mortality in traumatic extracranial bleeding. Intracranial bleeding is common after traumatic brain injury and can cause brain herniation and death. We assessed the effects of tranexamic acid in traumatic brain injury patients. OBJECTIVE To assess the effects of tranexamic acid on death, disability and vascular occlusive events in traumatic brain injury patients. We also assessed cost-effectiveness. DESIGN Randomised trial and economic evaluation. Patients were assigned by selecting a numbered treatment pack from a box containing eight packs that were identical apart from the pack number. Patients, caregivers and those assessing outcomes were masked to allocation. All analyses were by intention to treat. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of tranexamic acid versus no treatment from a UK NHS perspective using the trial results and a Markov model. SETTING 175 hospitals in 29 countries. PARTICIPANTS Adults with traumatic brain injury within 3 hours of injury with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of ≤ 12 or any intracranial bleeding on computerised tomography scan, and no major extracranial bleeding, were eligible. INTERVENTION Tranexamic acid (loading dose 1 g over 10 minutes then infusion of 1 g over 8 hours) or matching placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Head injury death in hospital within 28 days of injury in patients treated within 3 hours of injury. Secondary outcomes were early head injury deaths, all-cause and cause-specific mortality, disability, vascular occlusive events, seizures, complications and adverse events. RESULTS Among patients treated within 3 hours of injury (n = 9127), the risk of head injury death was 18.5% in the tranexamic acid group versus 19.8% in the placebo group (855/4613 vs. 892/4514; risk ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.86 to 1.02). In a prespecified analysis excluding patients with a Glasgow Coma Scale score of 3 or bilateral unreactive pupils at baseline, the results were 12.5% in the tranexamic acid group versus 14.0% in the placebo group (485/3880 vs. 525/3757; risk ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.00). There was a reduction in the risk of head injury death with tranexamic acid in those with mild to moderate head injury (166/2846 vs. 207/2769; risk ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 0.95), but in those with severe head injury (689/1739 vs. 685/1710; risk ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.91 to 1.07) there was no apparent reduction (p-value for heterogeneity = 0.030). Early treatment was more effective in mild and moderate head injury (p = 0.005), but there was no obvious impact of time to treatment in cases of severe head injury (p = 0.73). The risk of disability, vascular occlusive events and seizures was similar in both groups. Tranexamic acid is highly cost-effective for mild and moderate traumatic brain injury (base case of £4288 per quality-adjusted life-year gained). CONCLUSION Early tranexamic acid treatment reduces head injury deaths. Treatment is cost-effective for patients with mild or moderate traumatic brain injury, or those with both pupils reactive. FUTURE WORK Further trials should examine early tranexamic acid treatment in mild head injury. Research on alternative routes of administration is needed. LIMITATIONS Time to treatment may have been underestimated. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15088122, ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01402882, EudraCT 2011-003669-14, Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR20121000441277. FUNDING The project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 26. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. In addition, funding was provided by JP Moulton Charitable Trust, Joint Global Health Trials (Medical Research Council, Department for International Development and the Wellcome Trust). This project was funded by the NIHR Global Health Trials programme.