The efficacy of single-dose aprotinin 2 million KIU in reducing blood loss and its impact on the incidence of deep venous thrombosis in patients undergoing total hip replacement surgery

Pharmacological interventions for the prevention of bleeding in people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hip and knee replacement surgery is a well-established means of improving quality of life, but is associated with a significant risk of bleeding. One-third of people are estimated to be anaemic before hip or knee replacement surgery; coupled with the blood lost during surgery, up to 90% of individuals are anaemic postoperatively. As a result, people undergoing orthopaedic surgery receive 3.9% of all packed red blood cell transfusions in the UK. Bleeding and the need for allogeneic blood transfusions has been shown to increase the risk of surgical site infection and mortality, and is associated with an increased duration of hospital stay and costs associated with surgery. Reducing blood loss during surgery may reduce the risk of allogeneic blood transfusion, reduce costs and improve outcomes following surgery. Several pharmacological interventions are available and currently employed as part of routine clinical care.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative efficacy of pharmacological interventions for preventing blood loss in elective primary or revision hip or knee replacement, and to identify optimal administration of interventions regarding timing, dose and route, using network meta-analysis (NMA) methodology.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews, from inception to 18 October 2022: CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Transfusion Evidence Library (Evidentia), ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of people undergoing elective hip or knee surgery only. We excluded non-elective or emergency procedures, and studies published since 2010 that had not been prospectively registered (Cochrane Injuries policy). There were no restrictions on gender, ethnicity or age (adults only). We excluded studies that used standard of care as the comparator. Eligible interventions included: antifibrinolytics (tranexamic acid (TXA), aprotinin, epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA)), desmopressin, factor VIIa and XIII, fibrinogen, fibrin sealants and non-fibrin sealants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed the review according to standard Cochrane methodology. Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using CINeMA. We presented direct (pairwise) results using RevMan Web and performed the NMA using BUGSnet. We were interested in the following primary outcomes: need for allogenic blood transfusion (up to 30 days) and all-cause mortality (deaths occurring up to 30 days after the operation), and the following secondary outcomes: mean number of transfusion episodes per person (up to 30 days), re-operation due to bleeding (within seven days), length of hospital stay and adverse events related to the intervention received.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 102 studies. Twelve studies did not report the number of included participants; the other 90 studies included 8418 participants. Trials included more women (64%) than men (36%). In the NMA for allogeneic blood transfusion, we included 47 studies (4398 participants). Most studies examined TXA (58 arms, 56%). We found that TXA, given intra-articularly and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively, ranked the highest, with an anticipated absolute effect of 147 fewer blood transfusions per 1000 people (150 fewer to 104 fewer) (53% chance of ranking 1st) within the NMA (risk ratio (RR) 0.02, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0 to 0.31; moderate-certainty evidence). This was followed by TXA given orally at a total dose of 3 g pre-incision and postoperatively (RR 0.06, 95% CrI 0.00 to 1.34; low-certainty evidence) and TXA given intravenously and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g intraoperatively and postoperatively (RR 0.10, 95% CrI 0.02 to 0.55; low-certainty evidence). Aprotinin (RR 0.59, 95% CrI 0.36 to 0.96; low-certainty evidence), topical fibrin (RR 0.86, CrI 0.25 to 2.93; very low-certainty evidence) and EACA (RR 0.60, 95% CrI 0.29 to 1.27; very low-certainty evidence) were not shown to be as effective compared with TXA at reducing the risk of blood transfusion. We were unable to perform an NMA for our primary outcome all-cause mortality within 30 days of surgery due to the large number of studies with zero events, or because the outcome was not reported. In the NMA for deep vein thrombosis (DVT), we included 19 studies (2395 participants). Most studies examined TXA (27 arms, 64%). No studies assessed desmopressin, EACA or topical fibrin. We found that TXA given intravenously and orally at a total dose of greater than 3 g intraoperatively and postoperatively ranked the highest, with an anticipated absolute effect of 67 fewer DVTs per 1000 people (67 fewer to 34 more) (26% chance of ranking first) within the NMA (RR 0.16, 95% CrI 0.02 to 1.43; low-certainty evidence). This was followed by TXA given intravenously and intra-articularly at a total dose of 2 g pre-incision and intraoperatively (RR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.00 to 9.12; low-certainty evidence) and TXA given intravenously and intra-articularly, total dose greater than 3 g pre-incision, intraoperatively and postoperatively (RR 0.13, 95% CrI 0.01 to 3.11; low-certainty evidence). Aprotinin was not shown to be as effective compared with TXA (RR 0.67, 95% CrI 0.28 to 1.62; very low-certainty evidence). We were unable to perform an NMA for our secondary outcomes pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction and CVA (stroke) within 30 days, mean number of transfusion episodes per person (up to 30 days), re-operation due to bleeding (within seven days), or length of hospital stay, due to the large number of studies with zero events, or because the outcome was not reported by enough studies to build a network. There are 30 ongoing trials planning to recruit 3776 participants, the majority examining TXA (26 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that of all the interventions studied, TXA is probably the most effective intervention for preventing bleeding in people undergoing hip or knee replacement surgery. Aprotinin and EACA may not be as effective as TXA at preventing the need for allogeneic blood transfusion. We were not able to draw strong conclusions on the optimal dose, route and timing of administration of TXA. We found that TXA given at higher doses tended to rank higher in the treatment hierarchy, and we also found that it may be more beneficial to use a mixed route of administration (oral and intra-articular, oral and intravenous, or intravenous and intra-articular). Oral administration may be as effective as intravenous administration of TXA. We found little to no evidence of harm associated with higher doses of tranexamic acid in the risk of DVT. However, we are not able to definitively draw these conclusions based on the trials included within this review.

Efficacy and safety of systemic tranexamic acid administration in total knee arthroplasty: A case series

•

Tranexamic acid (TXA) can be administered via the intravenous (IV) and/or topical (intra-articular, IA) route, which can possibly interrupt the cascade of events due to hemostatic irregularities close to the source of bleeding.

•

IV TXA was found to be beneficial in terms of blood loss, blood transfusions, and postoperative hemoglobin drop without increasing thromboembolic complications.

•

Our recommendation that 1 g of TXA in IV be given 30 min prior to incision.

Introduction

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are associated with significant postoperative blood loss. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is a potent agent with antifibrinolytic activity, that can be administered via the intravenous (IV) and/or topical (intra-articular, IA) route, which can possibly interrupt the cascade of events due to hemostatic irregularities close to the source of bleeding. However, the literature contains scarce scientific evidence related to IV only TXA usage in TKA. The current study aims to compare the outcome between patients who were administered IV TXA and a control group in terms of blood loss, transfusion rate, and incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and thromboembolism (TE).

Methods

110 patients, who underwent TKA were placed into two groups: 1) 34 patients who received IV TXA; and 2) 76 patients in the control group. In the TXA group, patients received an IV TXA dose of 1 g, 30 min before incision. Two drains were placed.

Results

Usage of IV TXA showed better results when compared to the control group in terms of mean blood transfusion (0.5 less transfusion during hospital stay), hemoglobin drop (10%). No cases of DVT or TE were noted among the two study groups.

Conclusion

Use of IV TXA provided significantly better results compared to no TXA use with respect to all variables related to postoperative blood loss in TKA. Moreover, TXA use is safe in terms of incidence of symptomatic DVT and TE.

Efficacy of the Combined Administration of Systemic and Intra-Articular Tranexamic Acid in Total Hip Arthroplasty Secondary to Femoral Neck Fracture: A Retrospective Study

Background

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with substantial blood loss in the postoperative course. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is a potent antifibrinolytic agent, routinely administered by intravenous (IV) and topical (intra-articular, IA) route, which can possibly interrupt the cascade of events due to hemostatic irregularities close to the source of bleeding. However, scientific evidence of combined administration of TXA in THA secondary to a femoral neck fracture is still meagre. The present study aims to compare the patients who were administered combined IV and topical TXA with a control group in terms of blood loss, transfusion rate, and incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and thromboembolism (TE). Patients and Methods. 195 patients with femoral neck fracture underwent THA and were placed into two groups: (1) IV and IA TXA group which had 58 patients and (2) no TXA control group which had 137 patients. In the TXA group, 1 g IV TXA was administered 30 minutes before incision, and 1 g IA TXA was administered intraoperatively after fascia closure. No drains were placed, and soft spica was applied to the hip.

Results

Combined usage of IV and IA TXA showed better results when compared to the control group in terms of blood transfusion rate (31%) and hemoglobin drop (28%). No cases of DVT or TE were noted among the two study groups.

Conclusion

Combined use of IV and IA TXA provided significantly better results compared to no TXA use with respect to all variables related to postoperative blood loss in THA. Moreover, TXA use is safe in terms of incidence of symptomatic DVT and TE.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of antifibrinolytic agents in total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Antifibrinolytic agents such as tranexamic acid (TXA), epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA), and aprotinin are widely used to reduce bleeding and the need for transfusion in cardiac, orthopaedic, and hepatic surgery. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of antifibrinolytic agents in total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, as well as the reference lists of relevant articles. Only randomised controlled trials were eligible for this study. The weighted mean difference in blood loss, number of transfusions per patient, and the summary risk ratio of transfusion requirements and deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) were calculated in the antifibrinolytic agents-treated and control groups.

RESULTS

A total of 28 randomised controlled trials involving 2,131 patients were included. Patients receiving antifibrinolytic agents had a reduced total blood loss by a mean of 389.14 ml (95% CI, -483.05 to -295.23), and the number of blood transfusions per patient by 0.65 units (95% CI, -1.19 to -0.12). Antifibrinolytic agents led to a significant reduction in transfusion requirements (RR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.70) and no increase in the risk of DVT (RR 0.85; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.42).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that antifibrinolytic agents significantly reduce blood loss and blood transfusion requirements while not increasing the risk of DVT in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty.

Use of aprotinin to reduce blood loss and transfusion in major orthopedic surgery: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUD

Conflicting reports have been published regarding the effectiveness and safety of aprotinin in reducing blood loss and transfusion in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aprotinin in reducing blood loss and transfusion in major orthopedic surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant studies. Only randomized controlled trials were eligible for this study. The weighted mean difference in blood loss, and number of transfusions per patient and the summary risk ratio of transfusion requirements, and deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) were calculated in the aprotinin-treated group and the control group.

RESULTS

Eighteen randomized controlled trials involving 1276 patients were included. The use of aprotinin reduced total blood loss by a mean of 498.88 ml (95% confidence interval [CI]; -735.03 to -262.72), intra-operative blood loss by a mean of 246.11 ml (95% CI; -352.11 to -140.11), post-operative blood loss by a mean of 169.11 ml (95% CI; -234.06 to -105.55), the number of blood transfusions per patient by 0.93 units (95% CI; -1.36 to -0.51). Aprotinin led to a signficant reduction in transfusion requirements (RR 0.59; 95% CI; 0.51 to 0.69) and no increase in the risk of DVT (RR 0.58; 95% CI; 0.38 to 1.08).

CONCLUSION

The meta-analysis shows that aprotinin could significantly reduce blood loss and blood transfusion requirements in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery, and it did not appear to increase the risk of DVT.

The effect of tranexamic acid on blood loss and use of blood products in total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Studies have shown that tranexamic acid (TXA) reduces blood loss and transfusion need in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, no single study has been large enough to definitively determine whether the drug is safe and effective. We report a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of TXA in reducing blood loss and transfusion in TKA.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was done in Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CNKI. Two reviewers independently identified the eligible studies, assessed their methodological quality, and extracted data. The data were evaluated using the generic evaluation tool designed by the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group. The relevant data were analyzed using RevMan 5.0.

RESULTS

Fifteen randomized controlled trials involving 842 patients were included. The use of TXA reduced total blood loss by a mean of 487 ml [95% confidence interval (CI) -629 to -344], intra-operative blood loss by a mean of 127 ml (95% CI -313-59), and post-operative blood loss by a mean of 245 ml (95% CI -410 to -80). TXA led to a significant reduction in the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion (risk difference -0.4). There were no significant differences in deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism, or other complications among the study groups.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis indicates that TXA may reduce post-operative, total blood loss and transfusion in patients undergoing TKA. TXA led to a significant reduction in the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic study (Systematic review of Level I studies with inconsistent results), Level II.

Anti-fibrinolytic use for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood have led to the development of a range of interventions to minimise blood loss during major surgery. Anti-fibrinolytic drugs are widely used, particularly in cardiac surgery, and previous reviews have found them to be effective in reducing blood loss, the need for transfusion, and the need for re-operation due to continued or recurrent bleeding. In the last few years questions have been raised regarding the comparative performance of the drugs. The safety of the most popular agent, aprotinin, has been challenged, and it was withdrawn from world markets in May 2008 because of concerns that it increased the risk of cardiovascular complications and death.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effects of the anti-fibrinolytic drugs aprotinin, tranexamic acid (TXA), and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA) on blood loss during surgery, the need for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and adverse events, particularly vascular occlusion, renal dysfunction, and death.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register (July 2010), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) 1950 to July 2010, EMBASE (Ovid SP) 1980 to July 2010. References in identified trials and review articles were checked and trial authors were contacted to identify any additional studies. The searches were last updated in July 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-fibrinolytic drugs in adults scheduled for non-urgent surgery. Eligible trials compared anti-fibrinolytic drugs with placebo (or no treatment), or with each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. This version of the review includes a sensitivity analysis excluding trials authored by Prof. Joachim Boldt.

MAIN RESULTS

This review summarises data from 252 RCTs that recruited over 25,000 participants. Data from the head-to-head trials suggest an advantage of aprotinin over the lysine analogues TXA and EACA in terms of reducing perioperative blood loss, but the differences were small. Compared to control, aprotinin reduced the probability of requiring RBC transfusion by a relative 34% (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60 to 0.72). The RR for RBC transfusion with TXA was 0.61 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.70) and was 0.81 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.99) with EACA. When the pooled estimates from the head-to-head trials of the two lysine analogues were combined and compared to aprotinin alone, aprotinin appeared more effective in reducing the need for RBC transfusion (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).Aprotinin reduced the need for re-operation due to bleeding by a relative 54% (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.62). This translates into an absolute risk reduction of 2% and a number needed-to-treat (NNT) of 50 (95% CI 33 to 100). A similar trend was seen with EACA (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.99) but not TXA (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.17). The blood transfusion data were heterogeneous and funnel plots indicate that trials of aprotinin and the lysine analogues may be subject to publication bias.When compared with no treatment aprotinin did not increase the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.11), stroke (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.52), renal dysfunction (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.54) or overall mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06). Similar trends were seen with the lysine analogues, but data were sparse. These data conflict with the results of recently published non-randomised studies, which found increased risk of cardiovascular complications and death with aprotinin. There are concerns about the adequacy of reporting of uncommon events in the small clinical trials included in this review.When aprotinin was compared directly with either, or both, of the two lysine analogues it resulted in a significant increase in the risk of death (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02, 1.89), and a non-significant increase in the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 1.11 95% CI 0.82, 1.50). Most of the data contributing to this added risk came from a single study - the BART trial (2008).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Anti-fibrinolytic drugs provide worthwhile reductions in blood loss and the receipt of allogeneic red cell transfusion. Aprotinin appears to be slightly more effective than the lysine analogues in reducing blood loss and the receipt of blood transfusion. However, head to head comparisons show a lower risk of death with lysine analogues when compared with aprotinin. The lysine analogues are effective in reducing blood loss during and after surgery, and appear to be free of serious adverse effects.

Anti-fibrinolytic use for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood have led to the development of a range of interventions to minimise blood loss during major surgery. Anti-fibrinolytic drugs are widely used, particularly in cardiac surgery, and previous reviews have found them to be effective in reducing blood loss, the need for transfusion, and the need for re-operation due to continued or recurrent bleeding. In the last few years questions have been raised regarding the comparative performance of the drugs. The safety of the most popular agent, aprotinin, has been challenged, and it was withdrawn from world markets in May 2008 because of concerns that it increased the risk of cardiovascular complications and death.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effects of the anti-fibrinolytic drugs aprotinin, tranexamic acid (TXA), and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA) on blood loss during surgery, the need for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, and adverse events, particularly vascular occlusion, renal dysfunction, and death.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register (July 2010), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE (Ovid SP) 1950 to July 2010, EMBASE (Ovid SP) 1980 to July 2010. References in identified trials and review articles were checked and trial authors were contacted to identify any additional studies. The searches were last updated in July 2010.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-fibrinolytic drugs in adults scheduled for non-urgent surgery. Eligible trials compared anti-fibrinolytic drugs with placebo (or no treatment), or with each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

This review summarises data from 252 RCTs that recruited over 25,000 participants. Data from the head-to-head trials suggest an advantage of aprotinin over the lysine analogues TXA and EACA in terms of reducing perioperative blood loss, but the differences were small. Compared to control, aprotinin reduced the probability of requiring RBC transfusion by a relative 34% (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60 to 0.72). The RR for RBC transfusion with TXA was 0.61 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.70) and was 0.81 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.99) with EACA. When the pooled estimates from the head-to-head trials of the two lysine analogues were combined and compared to aprotinin alone, aprotinin appeared more effective in reducing the need for RBC transfusion (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).Aprotinin reduced the need for re-operation due to bleeding by a relative 54% (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.62). This translates into an absolute risk reduction of 2% and a number needed-to-treat (NNT) of 50 (95% CI 33 to 100). A similar trend was seen with EACA (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.99) but not TXA (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.17). The blood transfusion data were heterogeneous and funnel plots indicate that trials of aprotinin and the lysine analogues may be subject to publication bias.When compared with no treatment aprotinin did not increase the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.11), stroke (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.52), renal dysfunction (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.54) or overall mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06). Similar trends were seen with the lysine analogues, but data were sparse. These data conflict with the results of recently published non-randomised studies, which found increased risk of cardiovascular complications and death with aprotinin. There are concerns about the adequacy of reporting of uncommon events in the small clinical trials included in this review.When aprotinin was compared directly with either, or both, of the two lysine analogues it resulted in a significant increase in the risk of death (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.02, 1.89), and a non-significant increase in the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 1.11 95% CI 0.82, 1.50). Most of the data contributing to this added risk came from a single study - the BART trial (2008).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Anti-fibrinolytic drugs provide worthwhile reductions in blood loss and the receipt of allogeneic red cell transfusion. Aprotinin appears to be slightly more effective than the lysine analogues in reducing blood loss and the receipt of blood transfusion. However, head to head comparisons show a lower risk of death with lysine analogues when compared with aprotinin. The lysine analogues are effective in reducing blood loss during and after surgery, and appear to be free of serious adverse effects.

Use of antifibrinolytic therapy to reduce transfusion in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery: a systematic review of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Minimizing bleeding and transfusion is desirable given its cost, complexity and potential for adverse events. Concerns have been heightened by recent data demonstrating that bleeding events may predict worse outcomes and by warnings about the safety of erythropoietic stimulating agents. Prior small studies suggest that antifibrinolytic agents may reduce bleeding and transfusion need in patients undergoing total hip replacement (THR) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, no single study has been large enough to definitively determine if these agents are safe and effective. To address this issue we performed a systematic review of randomized trials describing the use of tranexamic acid, epsilon aminocaproic acid, or aprotinin administration in the perioperative setting.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane databases were searched for relevant trials. Two independent reviewers abstracted total blood loss, transfusion requirements, and venous thromboembolism (VTE) rates. Data were combined using the Mantel-Haenszel method and dichotomous data expressed as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Patients receiving antifibrinolytic agents had reduced transfusion need (RR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.64; P<0.00001), reduced blood loss and no increase in the risk of VTE (RR 0.95% CI, 0.80 to 1.10, I(2)=0%, P=0.531).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that antifibrinolytic agents may reduce bleeding and transfusion in patients undergoing THR or TKA who receive appropriate antithrombotic prophylaxis. There is a need for a large, adequately powered prospective study to carefully examine the safety and efficacy of these agents.

Efficacy of aprotinin as a blood conservation technique for adult deformity spinal surgery: a retrospective study

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective study that involved a total of 82 adult deformity patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery with instrumentation of 6 or more levels.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of aprotinin in reducing blood loss in adult spinal deformity patients.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Aprotinin is an antifibrinolytic agent, which has been proven to be effective as a blood-conserving agent in cardiac surgery. This study focused specifically on adult spine deformity patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed a total of 82 adult deformity patients (patients with diagnosis of adult scoliosis and kyphosis) who underwent spinal fusion surgery with instrumentation of 6 or more levels. Forty-one patients who received aprotinin were compared with a control group of 41 patients who did not receive aprotinin. Specific surgical outcome parameters and postoperative complications were assessed.

RESULTS

The average age of the patients was 47 years and 41 years for the aprotinin group and the control group respectively. Thirty-nine percent of cases and 44% of controls had staged anterior/posterior fusion surgery, 39% of cases and 41% of controls underwent single stage posterior fusion surgery and the remaining 27% of cases and 15% of controls had same day anterior and posterior fusion surgery. The average number of levels fused and instrumented was 11.2 for the aprotinin group and 10.7 for the control group. The differences in mean blood loss and blood returned by cell-saver were statistically significantly lower in the aprotinin group (1324 mL vs. 2113 mL; P = 0.005 and 390 mL vs. 657 mL; P = 0.003). The amount of drainage after surgery was similar (1421 mL vs. 1388 mL; P = 0.982). The aprotinin group received an average of 2.73 units of blood. This was significantly lower than the average 5.02 units that the controls received (P = 0.003). The rate of complications was comparable and no allergic reaction to aprotinin was noted. One case exhibited a transitory elevation of blood urea nitrogen/creatinine which resolved before discharge.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study suggest that the administration of aprotinin is a safe and effective method to reduce blood loss and to decrease the need for transfusions without increasing risk of complication in the younger patients in relatively good general health undergoing spinal deformity surgery requiring 6 or more levels of fusion.

Anti-fibrinolytic use for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood have led to the development of a range of interventions to minimise blood loss during major surgery. Anti-fibrinolytic drugs are widely used, particularly in cardiac surgery and previous reviews have found them to be effective in reducing blood loss and the need for transfusion. Recently, questions have been raised regarding the comparative performance of the drugs and the safety of the most popular agent, aprotinin.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative effects of the anti-fibrinolytic drugs aprotinin, tranexamic acid (TXA), and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA) on blood loss during surgery, the need for red blood (RBC) transfusion, and adverse events, particularly vascular occlusion, renal dysfunction, and death.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the internet. References in identified trials and review articles were checked and trial authors were contacted to identify any additional studies. The searches were last updated in July 2006.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of anti-fibrinolytic drugs in adults scheduled for non-urgent surgery. Eligible trials compared anti-fibrinolytic drugs with placebo (or no treatment), or with each other.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

This review summarises data from 211 RCTs that recruited 20,781 participants. Data from placebo/inactive controlled trials, and from head-to-head trials suggest an advantage of aprotinin over the lysine analogues TXA and EACA in terms of operative blood loss, but the differences were small. Aprotinin reduced the probability of requiring RBC transfusion by a relative 34% (relative risk [RR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61 to 0.71). The RR for RBC transfusion with TXA was 0.61 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.69) and it was 0.75 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.96) with EACA. When the pooled estimates from the head-to-head trials of the two lysine analogues were combined and compared to aprotinin alone, aprotinin appeared superior in reducing the need for RBC transfusion: RR 0.83 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.99). Aprotinin reduced the need for re-operation due to bleeding: RR 0.48 (95% CI 0.35 to 0.68). This translates into an absolute risk reduction of just under 3% and a number needed-to-treat (NNT) of 37 (95% CI 27 to 56). Similar trends were seen with TXA and EACA, but the data were sparse and the differences failed to reach statistical significance. The blood transfusion data were heterogeneous and funnel plots indicate that trials of aprotinin and the lysine analogues may be subject to publication bias. Evidence of publication bias was not observed in trials reporting re-operation rates. Adjustment for these effects reduced the magnitude of estimated benefits but did not negate treatment effects. However, the apparent advantage of aprotinin over the lysine analogues was small and may be explained by publication bias and non-equivalent drug doses. Aprotinin did not increase the risk of myocardial infarction (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.18), stroke (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.64) renal dysfunction (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.70) or overall mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.20). The analyses of myocardial infarction and death included data from the majority of subjects recruited into the clinical trials of aprotinin. However, under-reporting of renal events could explain the lack of effect seen with aprotinin. Similar trends were seen with the lysine analogues but data were sparse. These results conflict with the results of recently published non-randomised studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Anti-fibrinolytic drugs provide worthwhile reductions in blood loss and the need for allogeneic red cell transfusion. Based on the results of randomised trials their efficacy does not appear to be offset by serious adverse effects. In most circumstances the lysine analogues are probably as effective as aprotinin and are cheaper; the evidence is stronger for tranexamic acid than for aminocaproic acid. In high risk cardiac surgery, where there is a substantial probability of serious blood loss, aprotinin may be preferred over tranexamic acid. Aprotinin does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of vascular occlusion and death, but the data do not exclude an increased risk of renal failure. There is no need for further placebo-controlled trials of aprotinin or lysine analogues in cardiac surgery. The principal need is for large comparative trials to assess the relative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of anti-fibrinolytic drugs in different surgical procedures.

Aprotinin in Major Orthopedic Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Aprotinin therapy is a promising strategy for reducing blood loss and blood transfusion requirements. The efficacy and safety of aprotinin in orthopedic surgery, however, remain controversial. We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of the use of aprotinin in orthopedic surgery. Thirteen trials that included a total of 506 patients who underwent major orthopedic surgery were analyzed. The pooled intraoperative and perioperative blood loss was significantly less in the aprotinin-treated patients than in the control patients (weighted mean difference [WMD] for intraoperative blood loss = -229 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -367 to -91 mL, P = 0.0011; WMD for perioperative blood loss = -557 mL; 95% CI = -860 to -254 mL; P < 0.0001). The pooled amounts of red blood cell (RBC) units (U) transfused intraoperatively and perioperatively were significantly less in the aprotinin-treated patients than in the control patients (WMD for intraoperative RBC U = -1.1 U; 95% CI = -1.7 to -0.4 U; P = 0.0001; WMD for perioperative RBC U = -1.1 U; 95% CI = -1.7 to -0.5 U; P < 0.0001). Aprotinin was not associated with an increased incidence of deep vein thrombosis (odds ratio = 0.39; 95% CI = 0.14 to 1.05, P = 0.061). The authors conclude that aprotinin reduces the intraoperative and perioperative blood loss and allogeneic blood transfusion requirement and may not be associated with increased risk of deep vein thrombosis in the presence of pharmacological or mechanical prophylaxis in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery.

Aprotinin and epsilon aminocaproic acid are effective in reducing blood loss after primary total hip arthroplasty--a prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study

A prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study was undertaken to determine the efficacy and mechanism of action of two antifibrinolytic drugs aprotinin and epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA) in reducing blood loss in primary unilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA). Aprotinin was administered as a bolus of 2 x 10(6) kallikrein inhibitor units (KIU) followed by 0.5 x 10(6) KIU h(-1) for 3 h, EACA was given as 10 g over 30 min followed by 5 g over 3 h. The median postoperative blood loss 24 h postoperatively was reduced from 450 mL in the placebo group to 180 mL for aprotinin (60% reduction, P < 0.001) and to 210 mL for EACA (53% reduction, P < 0.01). In this population, there was no reduction in the perioperative transfusion requirements. The mechanism of both drugs was independent of platelets as indicated by flow cytometric measurement of change of their expression of P-selectin, platelet-monocyte aggregates, V/Va and CD40 ligand. There were no thrombotic or infective complications and no adverse events were attributable to use of either drug. Infusion of either aprotinin or EACA at the doses described is a safe and effective means of reducing blood loss after THA. These therapies provide a means of reducing blood loss in THA patients.

Evidence-based review of the role of aprotinin in blood conservation during orthopaedic surgery

Aprotinin is a serine protease inhibitor with antifibrinolytic properties that has been approved as a blood-conserving drug in cardiac surgery by the United States Food and Drug Administration. On the basis of the current evidence from Level-I trials, we make a grade-A recommendation for use of the high-dose aprotinin regimen in hip and spine surgery. Because of conflicting data, the low-dose aprotinin therapy as well as the use of aprotinin in patients with cancer cannot be recommended (grade-I recommendation). High-quality randomized trials are necessary to determine the optimal (and minimal) therapeutic dose of aprotinin and the optimal time of aprotinin administration during surgery.

The effect of aprotinin on blood loss in bilateral total knee arthroplasty

Twenty-five patients undergoing bilateral total knee arthroplasty were given aprotinin (1-2 million units) in doses adjusted for weight, infused at the end of the first arthroplasty. Blood management was compared with our previous series of 68 patients who were not treated with aprotinin. Blood drained and re-transfused in the first 6 h was significantly less in the aprotinin group (323 ml, S.D. 320) than the untreated group (1033 ml, S.D. 539, p<0.0005). The total blood drained was also less in the aprotinin group (713 ml compared to 1613 ml, p<0.0005) but this was accounted for soley by the difference in early blood loss. The use of other blood products was less in the aprotinin group (360 ml, S.D. 357 compared to 827 ml, S.D. 434, p<0.0005). The mean postoperative haemoglobin on the day following surgery was similar at around 10 g. There were no complications or adverse reactions to the use of aprotinin. We conclude that aprotinin significantly reduces early blood loss after bilateral knee arthroplasty. In our hands, we have found it to be safe. Further work is required to determine whether postoperative use may further reduce the need for blood transfusion.

Aprotinin and major orthopedic surgery

Aprotinin is a potent pharmacological agent that reduces bleeding and limits blood transfusion requirements in current surgical practice. Many studies have been conducted in orthopedic surgery. In several trials performed in total hip replacement (THR) and total knee replacement (TKN) patients, aprotinin only moderately decreased blood-loss-replacement requirements. Conversely, when aprotinin was used in patients at high risk for bleeding (cancer, sepsis, redone surgery), it developed a potent hemostatic activity and decreased blood transfusion significantly. No increase in deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism was observed. The only major side effect could be the potential occurrence of an anaphylactoid reaction. Prophylactic administration of aprotinin should be considered in extensive spine surgery and in high-risk major orthopedic operations. The decision to use aprotinin should be guided by a risk/benefit analysis.

Intraoperative blood management in joint replacement surgery

Interest is growing in blood conservation and avoidance of transfusion in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery, especially in the field of joint replacement. Several methods have proven successful in reducing intraoperative blood loss, which can translate into lessened allogeneic and autologous transfusion requirements. Available techniques include acute normovolemic hemodilution, hypotensive anesthesia, intraoperative blood salvage, specialized cautery, topical hemostatic agents, and pharmacologic agents given in the perioperative period. The greatest potential benefit arises in operations with greater expected blood loss or in special situations such as in patients with religious issues, bilateral joint replacement, coagulation disorders, or significant preoperative anemia.

A direct antifibrinolytic agent in major orthopedic surgery

Aprotinin is a potent pharmacological agent that reduces bleeding. In current surgical practices, the rate of blood transfusions has decreased with the use of aprotinin. Recently, studies using aprotinin have been conducted in orthopedic surgery. Several trials have been performed in patients undergoing total hip replacement and total knee replacement. Aprotinin moderately decreased blood loss in these patients. When aprotinin was used in patients with a high-risk of bleeding (ie, patients with cancer, sepsis, or undergoing reoperation), potent hemostatic activity occurred and the rate of blood transfusions significantly decreased. No increase in deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism was observed. One adverse effect was the potential occurrence of an anaphylactoid reaction. Prophylactic administration of aprotinin should be considered in extensive spine surgery and in high-risk orthopedic operations. The decision to use aprotinin can be guided by a risk/benefit analysis.

Perioperative blood and blood product management for spinal deformity surgery

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Spinal deformity surgery, like many other orthopedic procedures, involves significant operative blood loss. In order to avoid the necessity of bank blood transfusions, many blood management strategies have been devised.

PURPOSE

The goal of this review is to analyze the utility of current blood management strategies.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

Review paper.

METHODS

Using Medline reviews, pertinent data on blood management agents and strategies were assembled.

RESULTS

Techniques can be organized into preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative categories. Preoperative techniques include autologous blood donation and red cell augmentation. In addition to some established surgical and anesthesia techniques, recent pharmacologic agents have become available to include thrombotic agents and antifibrinolytics, which surgeons may add to their intraoperative armamentarium. A brief mention of postoperative blood salvage drains is also included.

CONCLUSIONS

The judicious use of the agents and techniques can significantly reduce the need for blood transfusions in the setting of spinal deformity surgery.

Pharmacological approaches to reducing allogeneic blood exposure

This article discusses evidence for the role of pharmacological interventions such as the protease inhibitor aprotinin (Trasylol), lysine analogue anti-fibrinolytics [tranexamic acid (Cyclokapron) and epsilon aminocaproic acid (Amicar)], DDAVP (Desmopressin) and recombinant Factor VIIa (NovoSeven), in preventing the need for blood and blood-component therapies after major (cardiac, hepatic and orthopaedic/trauma) surgery. The data show that aprotinin is consistently effective in reducing globally the transfusion burden in cardiac and hepatic surgical procedures. However, there are little data to support its use in routine elective orthopaedic surgery. Multiple studies have failed to show an increased risk for myocardial ischaemia or infarction with aprotinin, and there may even be a reduced incidence of perioperative stroke in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. An increased probability of a hypersensitivity reaction when the drug is readministered within a 6-month period remains a significant issue. The data for the lysine analogue anti-fibrinolytics show no evidence of efficacy in reducing the transfusion burden for epsilon aminocaproic acid and inconsistent results with tranexamic acid in cardiac and hepatic surgery. As with aprotinin therapy, there is a paucity of data to support their use in routine elective orthopaedic surgery. There are no data to support the routine use of DDAVP to reduce the transfusion burden. Limited data suggest that this drug may be effective when a defect in platelet function is demonstrated. This aspect deserves further investigation. Recombinant activated Factor VII (rFVIIa) has proven benefit for its licensed indication to reduce bleeding in haemophiliacs with inhibitors to Factors VIII and IX. Reports of benefit in other instances are largely anecdotal. Hence, at this time it is therefore speculative and premature to suggest whether there is a place for this agent in routine clinical practice. No adequately powered, placebo-controlled prospective studies are available to investigate the safety of the lysine analogues, DDAVP or rFVIIa in cardiac, hepatic or orthopaedic surgery.

Transfusion-sparing hemostatic agents

A variety of agents are available to improve hemostasis and reduce blood loss in multiple clinical settings. These agents are most commonly used to reduce bleeding when an underlying hemostatic defect is present. Some new agents offer the potential to decrease blood loss even in the absence of an obvious underlying hemostatic defect. The authors discuss the use of a variety of products to reduce bleeding and minimize transfusion of blood products in the setting of clotting factor deficiency or inhibition, platelet deficiency and/or dysfunction, increased fibrinolysis, therapeutic anticoagulation, and coagulopathies caused by dilution and consumption in the setting of trauma and surgery. The authors primarily focus on the available pharmaceuticals.

Perioperative blood management practices in elective orthopaedic surgery

Concern about the cost and safety of allogenic blood transfusion, including the risk of viral infection and immunosuppression, has led to refinements in and new approaches to blood conservation, including the development of transfusion practice standards and improvements in surgical practice. Preoperative autologous blood collection, the use of hemostatic agents, perioperative blood salvage, and the use of recombinant human erythropoietin (epoetin alfa) to stimulate erythropoiesis have contributed to decreased use of allogenic blood services. Development of appropriate blood management strategies to help reduce or eliminate exposure to allogenic blood requires a preoperative assessment of the likelihood of transfusion and of the risks as well as costs associated with conservation and replacement options. The informed selection of alternatives based on preoperative assessment of hematologic status, estimated blood loss, and sources for blood replacement may enhance blood management practices in major elective orthopaedic surgery.

Aprotinin versus placebo in major orthopedic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, dose-ranging study

We conducted a prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, dose-ranging study to compare the risk/benefit ratio of large- and small-dose aprotinin with placebo after major orthopedic surgery. Fifty-eight patients were randomized into three groups: Large-Dose Aprotinin (4 M kallikrein inactivator unit [KIU] bolus before surgery followed by a continuous infusion of 1 M KIU/h until the end of surgery), Small-Dose Aprotinin (2 M KIU bolus plus 0.5 M KIU/h), and Placebo. Bleeding was measured and calculated. Bilateral ascending venography was systematically performed on the third postoperative day. Measured and calculated blood loss decreased in the Large-Dose Aprotinin group (calculated bleeding, whole blood, hematocrit 30%, median [range], 2,023 mL [633-4,113] as compared with placebo, 3,577 mL [1,670-21,758 mL]). The total number of homologous and autologous units was also significantly decreased in the Large-Dose Aprotinin group (2 U [0-5 U] as compared with placebo, 4 U [0-42 U]). No increase in deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism was observed in the aprotinin groups. Large-dose aprotinin was safe and effective in dramatically reducing the measured and calculated bleeding and the amount of transfused red blood cell units after major orthopedic surgery.

IMPLICATIONS

Large doses of aprotinin decrease blood loss and transfusion amount in major orthopedic surgery.

Systemic hemostatic medications for reducing surgical blood loss

OBJECTIVE

To review randomized trials involving the use of systemic hemostatic medications for reducing surgical blood loss.

DATA SOURCES

Articles were obtained through searches of MEDLINE (1966-September 2000). The bibliographies of retrieved publications were reviewed for additional references.

STUDY SELECTION

All randomized studies and pharmacoeconomic evaluations that involved medications used for systemic hemostasis in the perioperative period were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Randomized studies involving conjugated estrogens, aminocaproic acid, tranexamic acid, desmopressin, and aprotinin for systemic hemostasis were extracted. Studies of proton-pump inhibitors for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and octreotide for variceal bleeding were excluded, as were trials involving the use of any hemostatic agent for cardiovascular surgery. The primary outcome under review was a reduction in bleeding as defined by reduced transfusion requirements.

DATA SYNTHESIS

There is limited efficacy and toxicity information concerning the use of conjugated estrogens for reducing surgery-related bleeding. Similarly, there are a limited number of randomized studies involving aminocaproic acid and tranexamic acid, and with the exception of tranexamic acid for reducing transfusion requirements with knee surgery, the study results are either conflicting or negative. For desmopressin, evidence from a substantial number of randomized trials documents its lack of efficacy. Aprotinin has reduced bleeding and transfusion requirements in a number of randomized studies involving patients undergoing orthopedic surgery, but cost-effectiveness studies are needed to better define its therapeutic role. Trials of aprotinin during hepatic surgery have yielded conflicting results.

CONCLUSIONS

Most hemostatic medications used for reducing surgery-related bleeding have limited or contradictory evidence of efficacy.

Anti-fibrinolytic use for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion

BACKGROUND

Concerns regarding the safety of transfused blood have prompted re-consideration of the use of allogeneic (blood from an unrelated donor) blood transfusion.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of the anti-fibrinolytic drugs aprotinin, tranexamic acid, and epsilon aminocaproic acid, on peri-operative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE (to May 1998), EMBASE (to December 1997), web sites of international health technology assessment agencies (to May 1998). References in identified trials and review articles were checked and authors contacted to identify any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of anti-fibrinolytic drugs in adults scheduled for non-urgent surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 61 trials of aprotinin (7027 participants). Aprotinin reduced the rate of RBC transfusion by a relative 30% (RR=0.70: 95%CI: 0.64 to 0.76). The average absolute risk reduction (ARR) was 20.4% (95%CI: 15.6% to 25.3%). On average, aprotinin use saved 1.1 units of RBC (95%CI: 0.69 to 1.47) in those requiring transfusion. Aprotinin also significantly reduced the need for re-operation due to bleeding (RR=0.40: 95%CI: 0.25 to 0.66). We found 18 trials of tranexamic acid (TXA) (1,342 participants). TXA reduced the rate of RBC transfusion by a relative 34% (RR=0.66: 95%CI: 0.54 to 0.81). This represented an ARR of 17.2% (95%CI: 8.7% to 25.7%). TXA use resulted in a saving of 1.03 units of RBC (95%CI: 0.67 to 1.39) in those requiring transfusion. We found four trials of epsilon aminocaproic acid (EACA) (208 participants). EACA use resulted in a statistically non-significant reduction in RBC transfusion (RR=0.48: 95%CI: 0.19 to 1.19). Comparisons between agents Eight trials made 'head-to-head' comparisons between TXA and aprotinin. There was no significant difference between the two drugs in the rate of RBC transfusion: RR=1.21 (95%CI: 0.83 to 1.76) for TXA compared to aprotinin. Adverse Effects Aprotinin did not seem to be associated with an excess risk of adverse effects, including thrombo-embolic events (thrombosis RR=0.64: 95%CI: 0.31 to 1.31) and renal failure (RR=1.19: 95%CI: 0.79 to 1.79). Fewer data were available for TXA and EACA.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

From this review it appears that aprotinin reduces the need for red cell transfusion, and the need for re-operation due to bleeding, without serious adverse effects. However, there was significant heterogeneity in trial outcomes, and some evidence of publication bias. Similar trends were seen with TXA and EACA, although the data were rather sparse. The poor evaluation of these latter drugs is unfortunate as results suggest they may be equally as effective as aprotinin, but are significantly cheaper. The evidence reviewed here supports the use of aprotinin in cardiac surgery. Further small trials of this drug are not warranted. Future trials should be large enough to compare the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of aprotinin with that of TXA and EACA.

Aprotinin (Trasylol) does not reduce bleeding in primary total hip arthroplasty

This is a randomized, double-blind, controlled study of the effects of aprotinin (Trasylol) during primary total hip arthroplasty. Sixty patients were randomized to receive either 1.5 x 10(6) KIU of aprotinin or a similar volume of normal saline as a bolus preoperatively. Blood loss was measured from the femoral canal at the time of surgery. An estimate of the total blood loss during the operation was made, and the transfusion requirement was recorded. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of total blood loss, postoperative hemoglobin, or transfusion requirement. In the group that received aprotinin, there was a trend toward reduced blood loss from the femoral canal, but this was not statistically significant. The results of this study do not support the routine use of aprotinin in primary total hip arthroplasty.

Aprotinin decreases exposure to allogeneic blood during primary unilateral total hip replacement

BACKGROUND

Aprotinin, a hemostatic agent, regulates fibrinolysis, modulates the intrinsic coagulation pathway, stabilizes platelet function, and exhibits anti-inflammatory properties through inhibition of serine proteases, such as trypsin, plasmin, and kallikrein. Aprotinin has been used successfully for many years in cardiac operations, and there have been preliminary investigations of its use in hip replacement operations. The objectives of this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aprotinin as a blood-sparing agent in patients undergoing an elective primary unilateral total hip replacement and to examine its effect on the prevalence of deep-vein thrombosis in this population.

METHODS

Seventy-three patients received a placebo; seventy-six patients, a low dose of aprotinin (a load of 500,000 kallikrein inhibitor units [KIU]); seventy-five, a medium dose of aprotinin (a load of 1,000,000 KIU, with infusion of 250,000 KIU per hour); and seventy-seven patients, a high dose of aprotinin (a load of 2,000,000 KIU, with infusion of 500,000 KIU per hour). The end points for the determination of efficacy were transfusion requirements and blood loss. Patients received standard prophylaxis against deep-vein thrombosis and underwent compression ultrasonography with color Doppler imaging of the proximal and distal venous systems of both legs to evaluate for the presence of deep-vein thrombosis.

RESULTS

Aprotinin reduced the percentages of patients who required any form of blood transfusion (47 percent of the patients managed with a placebo needed a transfusion compared with 28 percent of those managed with low-dose aprotinin [p = 0.02],27 percent of those managed with high-dose aprotinin [p = 0.008], and 40 percent of those managed with medium-dose aprotinin [p = 0.5]). Only 6 percent (twelve) of the 212 patients treated with aprotinin required allogeneic blood compared with 15 percent (ten) of the sixty-eight patients treated with the placebo (p = 0.03). Aprotinin decreased the estimated intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.02 for the low-dose group, p = 0.04 for the medium-dose group, and p = 0.1 for the high-dose group), the measured postoperative drainage volume (p = 0.4 for the low-dose group, p = 0.006 for the medium-dose group, and p = 0.000 for the high-dose group), and the mean reduction in the hemoglobin level on the second postoperative day (thirty-four grams per liter for the placebo group, twenty-eight grams per liter for the low-dose group [p = 0.000], twenty-six grams per liter for the medium-dose group [p = 0.000], and twenty-three grams per liter for the high-dose group [p = 0.0001). The rate of deep-vein thrombosis was similar for all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that aprotinin is safe and effective for use as a hemostatic agent in primary unilateral total hip replacements. In patients who are at high risk of receiving allogeneic blood, use of aprotinin may be of particular clinical and economic benefit.