Abstract

BACKGROUND Pelvic bone fractures may cause extensive bleeding; however, the efficacy of tranexamic acid (TXA) usage in pelvic fracture surgery remains unclear. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of TXA in open reduction and internal fixation surgery for pelvic and acetabular fracture. METHODS MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for studies published before April 22, 2020, that investigated the effect of TXA in the treatment of pelvic and acetabular fracture with open reduction and internal fixation. A pooled analysis was used to identify the differences between a TXA usage group and a control group in terms of estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion rates, and postoperative complications. RESULTS We included 6 studies involving 764 patients, comprising 293 patients who received TXA (TXA group) and 471 patients who did not (control group). The pooled analysis showed no differences in EBL between the groups (mean difference -64.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] -185.27 to -55.93, P = .29). The study period transfusion rate showed no significant difference between the groups (odds ratio [OR] 0.77, 95% CI 0.19-3.14, P = .71, I2 = 82%), nor in venous thromboembolism incidence (OR 1.53, 95% CI 0.44-5.25, P = .50, I2 = 0%) or postoperative infection rates (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.13-9.98, P = .90, I2 = 48%). CONCLUSIONS Despite several studies having recommended TXA administration in orthopedic surgery, our study did not find TXA usage to be more effective than not using TXA in pelvic and acetabular fracture surgery, especially in terms of EBL reduction, transfusion rates, and the risk of postoperative complications.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Many studies have documented the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) alongside anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) in the management of ACL injury, but evidence on the benefits of PRP in improving the clinical outcomes of ACLR is inconsistent. PURPOSE To help in our understanding, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of PRP on patient-reported functional scores, the clinical assessments of knee function and structure, and complications. STUDY DESIGN Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS We searched 9 online databases for RCTs published in English or Chinese that examined the effects of PRP on ACLR. The primary outcome measures were visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores. The secondary outcomes included KT-1000 arthrometer, pivot-shift test, Lysholm and Tegner scores, tunnel widening, graft characterization, and complications. Subgroup analyses were performed according to time of assessments. Fixed- and random-effects models were selected for data analysis. RESULTS A total of 14 studies were included. When PRP was injected to graft tunnels, the pooled VAS scores of the 2 groups were similar (P = .31), and the subgroup analysis found that VAS and IKDC only improved at 3 months postoperatively (P = .0003 and P < .00001, respectively). When PRP was used at the bone-patellar tendon-bone harvest sites, VAS was decreased in the first 6 months postoperatively (P < .00001), whereas IKDC score was not remarkably different (P = .07). After PRP injection, Lysholm scores at 3 months postoperatively was different between the 2 groups (P < .00001), but the Tegner scores (P = .86), KT-1000 measurements (P = .12), the positive rate of pivot-shift test (P = .64), the enlargement of tunnels (femoral, P = .91; tibial, P = .80), and the characterization of grafts (P = .05) were not different. No difference in complications was found in either group. CONCLUSION PRP applied alongside ACLR could reduce postoperative pain and improve knee function in the short and medium terms but is ineffective in the long term. PRP does not improve knee stability and the enlargement of tunnels and does not accelerate the healing of grafts. Further studies would be required.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Clinical studies on the impact of dexmedetomidine on tourniquet-induced systemic effects have been inconsistent. We investigated the impact of dexmedetomidine on tourniquet-induced systemic effects in total knee arthroplasty. METHODS Eighty patients were randomly assigned to either control (CON) or dexmedetomidine (DEX) group. The DEX group received an intravenous loading dose of 0.5 μg/kg DEX over 10 minutes, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.5 μg/kg/h from 10 minutes before the start of surgery until completion. The CON group received the same calculated volume of normal saline. Pain outcomes and metabolic and coagulative changes after tourniquet application and after tourniquet release were investigated. RESULTS The frequency of fentanyl administration postoperatively, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) volume at 24 hours postoperatively, total PCA volume consumed in 48 hours postoperatively, and VAS score for pain at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively were significantly lower in the DEX group than in the CON group. Ten minutes after the tourniquet release, the DEX group showed significantly higher pH and lower lactate level than those in the CON group. Antithrombin III activity and body temperature 10 minutes after tourniquet release were significantly lower in the DEX group than in the CON group. Ca(2+), K(+), HCO(3) (-), base excess, and PCO(2) levels 10 minutes after tourniquet release were not significantly different between the two groups. CONCLUSION We showed that DEX attenuated pain and hemodynamic, metabolic, and coagulative effects induced by the tourniquet. However, these metabolic and coagulative changes were within normal limits. Therefore, DEX could be used as an analgesic adjuvant, but should not be considered for routine use to prevent the systemic effects induced by tourniquet use.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is the leading cause of death and disability due to trauma. Early administration of tranexamic acid may benefit patients with TBI. OBJECTIVE To determine whether tranexamic acid treatment initiated in the out-of-hospital setting within 2 hours of injury improves neurologic outcome in patients with moderate or severe TBI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Multicenter, double-blinded, randomized clinical trial at 20 trauma centers and 39 emergency medical services agencies in the US and Canada from May 2015 to November 2017. Eligible participants (N = 1280) included out-of-hospital patients with TBI aged 15 years or older with Glasgow Coma Scale score of 12 or less and systolic blood pressure of 90 mm Hg or higher. INTERVENTIONS Three interventions were evaluated, with treatment initiated within 2 hours of TBI: out-of-hospital tranexamic acid (1 g) bolus and in-hospital tranexamic acid (1 g) 8-hour infusion (bolus maintenance group; n = 312), out-of-hospital tranexamic acid (2 g) bolus and in-hospital placebo 8-hour infusion (bolus only group; n = 345), and out-of-hospital placebo bolus and in-hospital placebo 8-hour infusion (placebo group; n = 309). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was favorable neurologic function at 6 months (Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended score >4 [moderate disability or good recovery]) in the combined tranexamic acid group vs the placebo group. Asymmetric significance thresholds were set at 0.1 for benefit and 0.025 for harm. There were 18 secondary end points, of which 5 are reported in this article: 28-day mortality, 6-month Disability Rating Scale score (range, 0 [no disability] to 30 [death]), progression of intracranial hemorrhage, incidence of seizures, and incidence of thromboembolic events. RESULTS Among 1063 participants, a study drug was not administered to 96 randomized participants and 1 participant was excluded, resulting in 966 participants in the analysis population (mean age, 42 years; 255 [74%] male participants; mean Glasgow Coma Scale score, 8). Of these participants, 819 (84.8%) were available for primary outcome analysis at 6-month follow-up. The primary outcome occurred in 65% of patients in the tranexamic acid groups vs 62% in the placebo group (difference, 3.5%; [90% 1-sided confidence limit for benefit, -0.9%]; P = .16; [97.5% 1-sided confidence limit for harm, 10.2%]; P = .84). There was no statistically significant difference in 28-day mortality between the tranexamic acid groups vs the placebo group (14% vs 17%; difference, -2.9% [95% CI, -7.9% to 2.1%]; P = .26), 6-month Disability Rating Scale score (6.8 vs 7.6; difference, -0.9 [95% CI, -2.5 to 0.7]; P = .29), or progression of intracranial hemorrhage (16% vs 20%; difference, -5.4% [95% CI, -12.8% to 2.1%]; P = .16). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with moderate to severe TBI, out-of-hospital tranexamic acid administration within 2 hours of injury compared with placebo did not significantly improve 6-month neurologic outcome as measured by the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01990768.

Abstract

BACKGROUND No FDA-approved medication improves outcomes following traumatic brain injury (TBI). A forthcoming clinical trial that evaluated the effects of two prehospital tranexamic acid (TXA) dosing strategies compared with placebo demonstrated no differences in thromboelastography (TEG) values. We proposed to explore the impact of TXA on markers of coagulation and fibrinolysis in patients with moderate to severe TBI. METHODS Data were extracted from a placebo-controlled clinical trial in which patients ≥15 years old with TBI (Glascow Coma Scale 3-12) and systolic blood pressure ≥90 mmHg were randomized prehospital to receive placebo bolus/placebo infusion (Placebo), 1 gram (g) TXA bolus/1g TXA infusion (Bolus Maintenance [BM]); or 2g TXA bolus/placebo infusion (Bolus Only [BO]). TEG was performed and coagulation measures including prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), international ratio (INR), fibrinogen, D-dimer, plasmin anti-plasmin (PAP), thrombin anti-thrombin (TAT), tissue plasminogen activator (tPA), and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) were quantified at admission and six hours later. RESULTS Of 966 patients receiving study drug, 700 had labs drawn at admission and six hours later. There were no statistically significant differences in TEG values, including LY30, between groups (p>0.05). No differences between PT, aPTT, INR, fibrinogen, TAT, tPA, and PAI-1 were demonstrated across treatment groups. Concentrations of D-dimer in TXA treatment groups were less than placebo at six hours (p<0.001). Concentrations of PAP were less in TXA treatment groups than placebo on admission (p<0.001) and six hours (p=0.02). No differences in D-dimer and PAP were observed between BM and BO. CONCLUSION While D-dimer and PAP levels reflect a lower degree of fibrinolysis following prehospital administration of TXA when compared to placebo in a large prehospital trial of patients with TBI, TEG obtained on admission and six hours later did not demonstrate any differences in fibrinolysis between the two TXA dosing regimens and placebo. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III; Diagnostic.