1.
The efficacy of tranexamic acid treatment with different time and doses for traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Huang H, Xin M, Wu X, Liu J, Zhang W, Yang K, Zhang J
Thrombosis journal. 2022;20(1):79
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Tranexamic acid (TXA) plays a significant role in the treatment of traumatic diseases. However, its effectiveness in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) seems to be contradictory, according to the recent publication of several meta-analyses. We aimed to determine the efficacy of TXA treatment at different times and doses for TBI treatment. METHODS PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared TXA and a placebo in adults and adolescents (≥ 15 years of age) with TBI up to January 31, 2022. Two authors independently abstracted the data and assessed the quality of evidence. RESULTS Of the identified 673 studies, 13 involving 18,675 patients met our inclusion criteria. TXA had no effect on mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.06), adverse events (RR 0.93, 95% Cl 0.76-1.14), severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score from 3 to 8) (RR 0.99, 95% Cl 0.94-1.05), unfavorable Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS < 4) (RR 0.96, 95% Cl 0.82-1.11), neurosurgical intervention (RR 1.11, 95% Cl 0.89-1.38), or rebleeding (RR 0.97, 95% Cl 0.82-1.16). TXA might reduce the mean hemorrhage volume on subsequent imaging (standardized mean difference, -0.35; 95% CI [-0.62, -0.08]). CONCLUSION TXA at different times and doses was associated with reduced mean bleeding but not with mortality, adverse events, neurosurgical intervention, and rebleeding. More research data is needed on different detection indexes and levels of TXA in patients with TBI, as compared to those not receiving TXA; although the prognostic outcome for all harm outcomes was not affected, the potential for harm was not ruled out. TRIAL REGISTRATION The review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42022300484).
2.
Cell salvage in emergency trauma surgery
Li J, Sun SL, Tian JH, Yang K, Liu R, Li J
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2015;((1):):CD007379.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Trauma is the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45 years. Over the past 20 years, intraoperative autologous transfusions (obtained by cell salvage, also known as intraoperative blood salvage (IBS)) have been used as an alternative to blood products from other individuals during surgery because of the risk of transfusion-related infections such as hepatitis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In this review, we sought to assess the effects and cost of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic surgery. OBJECTIVES To compare the effect and cost of cell salvage with those of standard care in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery. SEARCH METHODS We ran the search on 25 November 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), PubMed, and ISI Web of Science (SCI-Expanded & CPSI-SSH). We also screened reference lists and contacted principal investigators. SELECTION CRITERIA Randomised controlled trials comparing cell salvage with no cell salvage (standard care) in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two authors independently extracted data from the trial reports. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. MAIN RESULTS Only one small study (n = 44) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results suggested that cell salvage did not affect mortality overall (death rates were 67% (14/21 participants) in the cell salvage group and 65% (15/23) in the control group) (odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 3.72). For individuals with abdominal injury, mortality was also similar in both groups (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.10).Less donor blood was needed for transfusion within the first 24 hours postinjury in the cell salvage group compared with the control group (mean difference (MD) -4.70 units, 95% CI -8.09 to -1.31). Adverse events, notably postoperative sepsis, did not differ between groups (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.55). Cost did not notably differ between groups (MD -177.81, 95% CI -452.85 to 97.23, measured in GBP in 2002). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Evidence for the use of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery remains equivocal. Large, multicentre, methodologically rigorous trials are needed to assess the relative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of cell salvage in different surgical procedures in the emergency context.