1.
Efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in intracranial haemorrhage: A meta-analysis
Xiong Y, Guo X, Huang X, Kang X, Zhou J, Chen C, Pan Z, Wang L, Goldbrunner R, Stavrinou L, et al
PloS one. 2023;18(3):e0282726
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although some studies have shown that tranexamic acid is beneficial to patients with intracranial haemorrhage, the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid for intracranial haemorrhage remain controversial. METHOD The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched. The review followed PRISMA guidelines. Data were analyzed using the random-effects model. RESULTS Twenty-five randomized controlled trials were included. Tranexamic acid significantly inhibited hematoma growth in intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) and traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients. (ICH: mean difference -1.76, 95%CI -2.78 to -0.79, I2 = 0%, P < .001; TBI: MD -4.82, 95%CI -8.06 to -1.58, I2 = 0%, P = .004). For subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) patients, it significantly decreased the risk of hydrocephalus (OR 1.23, 95%CI 1.01 to 1.50, I2 = 0%, P = .04) and rebleeding (OR, 0.52, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.79, I2 = 56% P = .002). There was no significance in modified Rankin Scale, Glasgow Outcome Scale 3-5, mortality, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or ischemic stroke/transient ischemic. CONCLUSION Tranexamic acid can significantly reduce the risk of intracranial haemorrhage growth in patients with ICH and TBI. Tranexamic acid can reduce the incidence of complications (hydrocephalus, rebleeding) in patients with SAH, which can indirectly improve the quality of life of patients with intracranial haemorrhage.
2.
Tranexamic Acid in Cerebral Hemorrhage: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
Hu W, Xin Y, Chen X, Song Z, He Z, Zhao Y
CNS drugs. 2019
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tranexamic acid functions as an antifibrinolytic medication and is widely used to treat or prevent excessive blood loss in menorrhagia and during the perioperative period. The efficacy of tranexamic acid in reducing mortaligy and disability, and the occurrence of complications during treatment of cerebral hemorrhage remains controversial. OBJECTIVE The objective of this systematic literature review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in patients with cerebral hemorrhage, aiming to improve the evidence-based medical knowledge of treatment options for such patients. METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in English through 31 August 2018, with two reviewers independently extracting data and assessing risk of bias. We extracted efficacy and safety outcomes and performed a meta-analysis. Statistical tests were performed to check for heterogeneity and publication bias. RESULTS In total, 14 randomized controlled trials with 4703 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Tranexamic acid did not improve mortality by day 90 (odds ratio (OR) 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.18; p = 0.95) or day 180 (OR 1.01; 95% CI 0.51-2.01; p = 0.98) or overall death endpoints of different follow-up times (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.62-1.08; p = 0.15), which was supported by sensitivity analysis of studies published during or after 2000 (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.77-1.09; p = 0.33). A lower incidence of hematoma expansion (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.37-0.80; p = 0.002) and less change in volume from baseline (mean difference (MD) - 1.98; 95% CI - 3.00 to - 0.97; p = 0.0001) were observed, but no change was seen in poor functional outcomes (OR 0.95; 95% CI 0.79-1.14; p = 0.55) in the tranexamic acid group. The risk of hydrocephalus (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.90-1.62; p = 0.21), ischemic stroke (OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.87-2.34; p = 0.16), deep vein thrombosis (OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.75-2.08; p = 0.40), and pulmonary embolism (OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.59-1.58; p = 0.89) was similar, whereas the risk of combined ischemic events increased in the tranexamic acid group (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.07-2.01; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Treatment with tranexamic acid could reduce rebleeding and hematoma expansion in cerebral hemorrhage without an increase in single ischemic adverse events, but it could increase the risk of combined ischemic events; however, the lack of improvement in mortality and the poor functional outcomes limit the value of clinical application. These findings indicate that the most pertinent issue is the risk-to-benefit ratio with tranexamic acid treatment in cerebral hemorrhage.
3.
Different dose regimes and administration methods of tranexamic acid in cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized trials
Guo J, Gao X, Ma Y, Lv H, Hu W, Zhang S, Ji H, Wang G, Shi J
BMC anesthesiology. 2019;19(1):129
Abstract
BACKGROUND The efficacy of tranexamic acid (TXA) to reduce perioperative blood loss and allogeneic blood transfusion in cardiac surgeries has been proved in previous studies, but its adverse effects especially seizure has always been a problem of concern. This meta-analysis aims to provide information on the optimal dosage and delivery method which is effective with the least adverse outcomes. METHODS We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and EMBASE for all relevant articles published before 2018/12/31. Inclusion criteria were adult patients undergoing elective heart surgeries, and only randomized control trials comparing TXA with placebo were considered. Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted relevant data. RESULTS We included 49 studies with 10,591 patients into analysis. TXA significantly reduced transfusion rate (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.78, P<0.00001). The overall transfusion rate was 35%(1573/4477) for patients using TXA and 49%(2190/4408) for patients in the control group. Peri-operative blood loss (MD - 246.98 ml, 95% CI - 287.89 to - 206.06 ml, P<0.00001) and re-operation rate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.79, P<0.0001) were also reduced significantly. TXA usage did not increase risk of mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, pulmonary embolism and renal dysfunction, but was associated with a significantly increase in seizure attack (RR 3.21, 95% CI 1.04 to 9.90, P = 0.04).The overall rate of seizure attack was 0.62%(21/3378) for patients using TXA and 0.15%(5/3406) for patients in the control group. In subgroup analysis, TXA was effective for both on-pump and off-pump surgeries. Topical application didn't reduce the need for transfusion requirement, while intravenous delivery no matter as bolus injection alone or bolus plus continuous infusion were effective. Intravenous high-dose TXA didn't further decrease transfusion rate compared with low-dose regimen, and increased the risk of seizure by 4.83 times. No patients in the low-dose group had seizure attack. CONCLUSIONS TXA was effective in reducing transfusion requirement in all kinds of cardiac surgeries. Low-dose intravenous infusion was the most preferable delivery method which was as effective as high-dose regimen in reducing transfusion rate without increasing the risk of seizure.