The effects of intra-articular tranexamic acid given intraoperatively and intravenous tranexamic acid given preoperatively on post surgical bleeding and transfusion rate post total knee arthroplasty

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.

Intra-articular versus intravenous administration of tranexamic acid in lower limb total arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

AIM

The ideal route of tranexamic acid (TXA) administration in total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. This study aims to identify the optima route of TXA administration in THA or TKA.

METHODS

PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and CENTRAL database were systematically searched until 4 August 2021 for randomised studies that compared intravenous (IV) or intra-articular (IA) administration of TXA in THA or TKA.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies enrolling 8335 patients (IA: 4162; IV: 4173) were eligible for quantitative and qualitative analysis. Comparable results were demonstrated in the incidence of venous thromboembolisation (OR:0.96, p = 0.84), total blood loss (MD: - 9.05, p = 0.36), drain output (MD: - 7.36, p = 0.54), hidden blood loss (MD: - 6.85, p = 0.47), postoperative haemoglobin level (MD: 0.01, p = 0.91), haemoglobin drop (MD: - 0.10, p = 0.22), blood transfusion rate (OR: 0.99, p = 0.87), total adverse events (OR: 1.12, p = 0.28), postoperative range of motion (MD: 1.08, p = 0.36), postoperative VAS pain score (MD: 0.13, p = 0.24) and postoperative D-dimer level (MD: 0.61, p = 0.64). IV route of TXA administration was associated with significantly longer length of hospital stay compared to IA route of administration (MD: - 0.22, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis, both IV and IA route of TXA administration were equally effective in managing blood loss and postoperative outcomes in lower limb joints arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1. PROSPERO Registration CRD42021271355.

Prophylactic Topical Tranexamic Acid Versus Placebo in Surgical Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis∗

OBJECTIVES

Perioperative bleeding remains a major concern to all clinicians caring for perioperative patients. Due to the theoretical risk of thromboembolic events associated with tranexamic acid (TXA) when administered intravenously, topical route of TXA has been extensively studied, but its safety and efficacy profile remain unclear in the literature. The primary aim of this review was to assess the effect of topical TXA on incidence of blood transfusion and mortality in adults undergoing surgery.

DATA SOURCES

EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ISI Web of Science were systematically searched from their inception until May 31, 2019.

REVIEW METHODS

Parallel-arm randomized controlled trials were included.

RESULTS

Seventy-one trials (7539 participants: orthopedics 5450 vs nonorthopedics 1909) were included for quantitative meta-analysis. In comparison to placebo, topical TXA significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss [mean difference (MD) -36.83 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI) -54.77 to -18.88, P < 0.001], total blood loss (MD -319.55 mL, 95% CI -387.42 to -251.69, P < 0.001), and incidence of blood transfusion [odds ratio (OR) 0.30, 95% CI 0.26-0.34, P < 0.001]. Patients who received topical TXA were associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (MD -0.28 days, 95% CI -0.47 to -0.08, P = 0.006). No adverse events associated with the use of topical TXA were observed, namely mortality (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.45-1.36, P = 0.39), pulmonary embolism (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.27-1.93, P = 0.52), deep vein thrombosis (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65-1.77, P = 0.79), myocardial infarction (OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.21-2.99, P = 0.73), and stroke (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.28-2.57, P = 0.77). Of all included studies, the risk of bias assessment was "low" for 20 studies, "unclear" for 26 studies and "high" for 25 studies.

CONCLUSIONS

In the meta-analysis of 71 trials (7539 patients), topical TXA reduced the incidence of blood transfusion without any notable adverse events associated with TXA in adults undergoing surgery.

PROSPERO

CRD 42018111762.

Comparison of blood loss between intra-articular and intra-venous administration of tranexamic acid in primary total knee arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

To compare the blood loss between intra-articular and intra-venous administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty.

DESIGN OF STUDY

It was a randomized controlled trial. Study duration and settings: This study was carried out at the Orthopedic Departments of Combined Military Hospital Lahore and Rawalpindi from Jan 2016 to March 2018.

METHODOLOGY

Patients of both the genders were involved this study who had age in the rage of 40-80 years undergoing primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty for degenerative conditions like osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. These patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups. Patients in IA group received intra-articular tranexamic acid while those in IV group received intravenous tranexamic acid. From all the patients, a written signed consent was taken.

FINDINGS

Females were predominant with male-to-female ratio of 1:3.7. The mean age of the patients was 67.3 ± 8.2 years while the mean BMI was 30.9 ± 2.9 Kg/m². Majority (n = 191, 95.5%) of the patients had osteoarthritis while remaining 9 (4.5%) patients had rheumatoid arthritis. There was no statistically significant difference between intra-articular and intra-venous administration of tranexamic acid in terms of mean post-operative hemoglobin (9.93 ± 1.14 vs. 9.87 ± 1.26 g/dL; p-value = 0.724), mean post-operative hematocrit (34.8 ± 1.66 vs. 34.73 ± 1.27%; p-value = 0.594), and mean fall in hemoglobin (2.27 ± 0.34 vs. 2.25 ± 0.30 g/dL; p-value = 0.587) and hematocrit (2.34 ± 0.94 vs. 2.46 ± 0.28%; p-value = 0.216).

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular administration of tranexamic acid was found to be as effective and safe as intra-venous administration in reducing blood loss in primary total knee arthroplasty. Due to convenience, the use of intra-articular administration of tranexamic acid after primary TKA may be considered in future practice.

Exclusion criteria and adverse events in perioperative trials of tranexamic acid: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an inexpensive therapy effective at minimizing perioperative blood loss and transfusion. However, it remains underutilized due to safety concerns. To date, no evidence-based guidelines exist identifying which patients should not receive TXA therapy. This study determined patient groups for whom safety information regarding TXA is lacking due to common exclusion from perioperative TXA trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

A systematic review searching the databases Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) administering systemic TXA perioperatively to elective or emergent surgery patients were eligible. Our primary outcome was to describe exclusion criteria of RCTs, and the secondary outcome was TXA safety. A descriptive synthesis of exclusion criteria was performed, and TXA safety was assessed by meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 268 eligible RCTs were included. Meta-analysis showed that systemic TXA did not increase risk of adverse events compared to placebo or no intervention (relative risk, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.99-1.12). Patient groups commonly excluded from perioperative TXA trials, and thus potentially lacking TXA safety data, were those with major comorbidities, a history of thromboembolism, medication use affecting coagulation, TXA allergy, and coagulopathy. Exclusion of patients with major comorbidities may not be necessary; we showed that the risk of adverse events was similar in studies that excluded patients with major comorbidities and those that did not.

CONCLUSION

Sufficient evidence exists to develop perioperative guidelines for TXA use in many populations. Further studies evaluating perioperative TXA use in patients with a history of thromboembolism are warranted.