Tranexamic acid in traumatic brain injury: systematic review and meta-analysis trumps a large clinical trial?

When to use tranexamic acid for the treatment of major bleeding?

Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent originally developed for the management of bleeding in the setting of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). Over the last 15 years, there has been accumulating evidence on the use of TXA for the treatment of active bleeding in a variety of clinical contexts. Clinical trials have shown that the efficacy and safety of TXA for the treatment of bleeding differ according to the clinical context in which it is being administered, timing of administration, and dose. Early administration is important for efficacy, particularly in trauma and PPH. Further studies are needed to understand the mechanisms by which TXA provides benefit, optimal modes of administration and dosing, and its effect in some clinical settings, such as spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage. There is no evidence that TXA increases the risk of thrombotic events in patients with major bleeding overall. However, there is evidence of increased risk of venous thrombosis in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. There is also evidence of increased risk of seizures with the use of higher doses. This review summarizes the current evidence for the use of TXA for patients with active bleeding and highlights the importance of generating evidence of efficacy and safety of hemostatic interventions specific to the bleeding contexts-as findings from 1 clinical setting may not be generalizable to other contexts-and that of individual patient assessment for bleeding, thrombotic, and other risks, as well as important logistical and other practical considerations, to optimize care and outcomes in these settings.

The Fibrinolytic System and Its Measurement: History, Current Uses and Future Directions for Diagnosis and Treatment

The fibrinolytic system is a key player in keeping the haemostatic balance, and changes in fibrinolytic capacity can lead to both bleeding-related and thrombosis-related disorders. Our knowledge of the fibrinolytic system has expanded immensely during the last 75 years. From the first successful use of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction in the 1960s, thrombolytic therapy is now widely implemented and has reformed treatment in vascular medicine, especially ischemic stroke, while antifibrinolytic agents are used routinely in the prevention and treatment of major bleeding worldwide. Despite this, this research field still holds unanswered questions. Accurate and timely laboratory diagnosis of disturbed fibrinolysis in the clinical setting remains a challenge. Furthermore, despite growing evidence that hypofibrinolysis plays a central role in, e.g., sepsis-related coagulopathy, coronary artery disease, and venous thromboembolism, there is currently no approved treatment of hypofibrinolysis in these settings. The present review provides an overview of the fibrinolytic system and history of its discovery; measurement methods; clinical relevance of the fibrinolytic system in diagnosis and treatment; and points to future directions for research.

Traumatic brain injury: progress and challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) has the highest incidence of all common neurological disorders, and poses a substantial public health burden. TBI is increasingly documented not only as an acute condition but also as a chronic disease with long-term consequences, including an increased risk of late-onset neurodegeneration. The first Lancet Neurology Commission on TBI, published in 2017, called for a concerted effort to tackle the global health problem posed by TBI. Since then, funding agencies have supported research both in high-income countries (HICs) and in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). In November 2020, the World Health Assembly, the decision-making body of WHO, passed resolution WHA73.10 for global actions on epilepsy and other neurological disorders, and WHO launched the Decade for Action on Road Safety plan in 2021. New knowledge has been generated by large observational studies, including those conducted under the umbrella of the International Traumatic Brain Injury Research (InTBIR) initiative, established as a collaboration of funding agencies in 2011. InTBIR has also provided a huge stimulus to collaborative research in TBI and has facilitated participation of global partners. The return on investment has been high, but many needs of patients with TBI remain unaddressed. This update to the 2017 Commission presents advances and discusses persisting and new challenges in prevention, clinical care, and research.

In LMICs, the occurrence of TBI is driven by road traffic incidents, often involving vulnerable road users such as motorcyclists and pedestrians. In HICs, most TBI is caused by falls, particularly in older people (aged ≥65 years), who often have comorbidities. Risk factors such as frailty and alcohol misuse provide opportunities for targeted prevention actions. Little evidence exists to inform treatment of older patients, who have been commonly excluded from past clinical trials—consequently, appropriate evidence is urgently required. Although increasing age is associated with worse outcomes from TBI, age should not dictate limitations in therapy. However, patients injured by low-energy falls (who are mostly older people) are about 50% less likely to receive critical care or emergency interventions, compared with those injured by high-energy mechanisms, such as road traffic incidents.

Mild TBI, defined as a Glasgow Coma sum score of 13–15, comprises most of the TBI cases (over 90%) presenting to hospital. Around 50% of adult patients with mild TBI presenting to hospital do not recover to pre-TBI levels of health by 6 months after their injury. Fewer than 10% of patients discharged after presenting to an emergency department for TBI in Europe currently receive follow-up. Structured follow-up after mild TBI should be considered good practice, and urgent research is needed to identify which patients with mild TBI are at risk for incomplete recovery.

The selection of patients for CT is an important triage decision in mild TBI since it allows early identification of lesions that can trigger hospital admission or life-saving surgery. Current decision making for deciding on CT is inefficient, with 90–95% of scanned patients showing no intracranial injury but being subjected to radiation risks. InTBIR studies have shown that measurement of blood-based biomarkers adds value to previously proposed clinical decision rules, holding the potential to improve efficiency while reducing radiation exposure. Increased concentrations of biomarkers in the blood of patients with a normal presentation CT scan suggest structural brain damage, which is seen on MR scanning in up to 30% of patients with mild TBI. Advanced MRI, including diffusion tensor imaging and volumetric analyses, can identify additional injuries not detectable by visual inspection of standard clinical MR images. Thus, the absence of CT abnormalities does not exclude structural damage—an observation relevant to litigation procedures, to management of mild TBI, and when CT scans are insufficient to explain the severity of the clinical condition.

Although blood-based protein biomarkers have been shown to have important roles in the evaluation of TBI, most available assays are for research use only. To date, there is only one vendor of such assays with regulatory clearance in Europe and the USA with an indication to rule out the need for CT imaging for patients with suspected TBI. Regulatory clearance is provided for a combination of biomarkers, although evidence is accumulating that a single biomarker can perform as well as a combination. Additional biomarkers and more clinical-use platforms are on the horizon, but cross-platform harmonisation of results is needed. Health-care efficiency would benefit from diversity in providers.

In the intensive care setting, automated analysis of blood pressure and intracranial pressure with calculation of derived parameters can help individualise management of TBI. Interest in the identification of subgroups of patients who might benefit more from some specific therapeutic approaches than others represents a welcome shift towards precision medicine. Comparative-effectiveness research to identify best practice has delivered on expectations for providing evidence in support of best practices, both in adult and paediatric patients with TBI.

Progress has also been made in improving outcome assessment after TBI. Key instruments have been translated into up to 20 languages and linguistically validated, and are now internationally available for clinical and research use. TBI affects multiple domains of functioning, and outcomes are affected by personal characteristics and life-course events, consistent with a multifactorial bio-psycho-socio-ecological model of TBI, as presented in the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) 2022 report. Multidimensional assessment is desirable and might be best based on measurement of global functional impairment. More work is required to develop and implement recommendations for multidimensional assessment. Prediction of outcome is relevant to patients and their families, and can facilitate the benchmarking of quality of care. InTBIR studies have identified new building blocks (eg, blood biomarkers and quantitative CT analysis) to refine existing prognostic models. Further improvement in prognostication could come from MRI, genetics, and the integration of dynamic changes in patient status after presentation.

Neurotrauma researchers traditionally seek translation of their research findings through publications, clinical guidelines, and industry collaborations. However, to effectively impact clinical care and outcome, interactions are also needed with research funders, regulators, and policy makers, and partnership with patient organisations. Such interactions are increasingly taking place, with exemplars including interactions with the All Party Parliamentary Group on Acquired Brain Injury in the UK, the production of the NASEM report in the USA, and interactions with the US Food and Drug Administration. More interactions should be encouraged, and future discussions with regulators should include debates around consent from patients with acute mental incapacity and data sharing. Data sharing is strongly advocated by funding agencies. From January 2023, the US National Institutes of Health will require upload of research data into public repositories, but the EU requires data controllers to safeguard data security and privacy regulation. The tension between open data-sharing and adherence to privacy regulation could be resolved by cross-dataset analyses on federated platforms, with the data remaining at their original safe location. Tools already exist for conventional statistical analyses on federated platforms, however federated machine learning requires further development. Support for further development of federated platforms, and neuroinformatics more generally, should be a priority.

This update to the 2017 Commission presents new insights and challenges across a range of topics around TBI: epidemiology and prevention (section 1 ); system of care (section 2 ); clinical management (section 3 ); characterisation of TBI (section 4 ); outcome assessment (section 5 ); prognosis (Section 6 ); and new directions for acquiring and implementing evidence (section 7 ). Table 1 summarises key messages from this Commission and proposes recommendations for the way forward to advance research and clinical management of TBI.

Appraising the use of tranexamic acid in traumatic and non-traumatic intracranial hemorrhage: A narrative review

Recently there has been increasing interest and debate on the use of tranexamic acid (TXA), an antifibrinolytic drug, in both traumatic and non-traumatic intracranial hemorrhage. In this review we aim to discuss recent investigations looking at TXA in traumatic brain injury (TBI) and different categories of spontaneous intracranial hemorrhage. We also discuss differences between setting (hospital vs pre-hospital), dosing and timing strategies, and other logistical challenges surrounding optimal use of TXA for isolated intracranial hemorrhage. Last, we hope to provide guidance for clinicians when considering the use of TXA in a patient with traumatic or non-traumatic intracranial hemorrhage based on appraisal of the available literature as well as some potential ideas for future research in this area.

Current Clinical Trials in Traumatic Brain Injury

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is one of the leading causes of morbidity, disability and mortality across all age groups globally. Currently, only palliative treatments exist, but these are suboptimal and do little to combat the progressive damage to the brain that occurs after a TBI. However, multiple experimental treatments are currently available that target the primary and secondary biochemical and cellular changes that occur after a TBI. Some of these drugs have progressed to clinical trials and are currently being evaluated for their therapeutic benefits in TBI patients. The aim of this study was to identify which drugs are currently being evaluated in clinical trials for TBI. A search of ClinicalTrials.gov was performed on 3 December 2021 and all clinical trials that mentioned “TBI” OR “traumatic brain injury” AND “drug” were searched, revealing 362 registered trials. Of the trials, 46 were excluded due to the drug not being mentioned, leaving 138 that were completed and 116 that were withdrawn. Although the studies included 267,298 TBI patients, the average number of patients per study was 865 with a range of 5–200,000. Of the completed studies, 125 different drugs were tested in TBI patients but only 7 drugs were used in more than three studies, including amantadine, botulinum toxin A and tranexamic acid (TXA). However, previous clinical studies using these seven drugs showed variable results. The current study concludes that clinical trials in TBI have to be carefully conducted so as to reduce variability across studies, since the severity of TBI and timing of therapeutic interventions were key aspects of trial success.

Prehospital Tranexamic Acid (TXA) in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains a significant medical and socioeconomic challenge. The initial injury may be complicated by haemostatic derangements leading to exacerbation of lesions and haemorrhagic progression. The results from the CRASH-3 trial have promoted the implementation of the antifibrinolytic tranexamic acid (TXA) into prehospital Emergency Medical Services (EMS) protocols. Very recently, the efficacy and safety of early out-of-hospital TXA compared to placebo was assessed in patients with moderate or severe TBI in a prospective, multicenter phase II trial, e.g. "The Prehospital TXA for TBI"-trial. Simultaneously, the results from a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected observational data into the Dutch pre-hospital TBI database were published which had assessed whether prehospital administration of TXA may be associated with mortality and functional outcomes in patients with severe TBI. Both studies are reviewed against their limitations and windows of opportunity are highlighted.