4.5 Article

Effectiveness of tranexamic acid in reducing blood loss in spinal surgery: a meta-analysis

Journal

BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-15-448

Keywords

Tranexamic acid; Spine; Surgery; Meta-analysis

Funding

  1. Changhai hospital [CH125520900]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The aim of present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of tranexamic acid (TXA) use in reducing blood loss and the related thrombotic complications in spinal surgery. Methods: Three databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) were searched through October 2012 to identify the relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the TXA effective in spinal surgery. Mean differences (MDs) of blood loss, blood transfusions, and postoperative partial thromboplastic time (PTT), odds ratios (ORs) of blood transfusion and thrombotic complication in TXA-treated group compared to placebo group were extracted and combined using random-effect meta-analysis. Results: A total of 6 RCTs comprising 411 patients were included in the meta-analysis according to the pre-defined selection criteria. TXA-treated group had significantly less amount of blood loss and blood transfusions per patient, and had smaller proportion of patients who required a blood transfusion compared with the placebo group. The use of TXA can significantly reduce the postoperative PTT with weighted MD of -1.59 [(95% confidence interval (CI):-3.07, -0.10] There is a null association between thrombosis complications and the use of TXA. Conclusion: We conclude that the use of TXA in patients undergoing spinal surgery appears to be effective in reducing the amount of blood loss, the volume of blood transfusion, the transfusion rate, and the postoperative PTT. However, data were too limited for any conclusions regarding safety. More high-quality RCTs are required before recommending the administered of TXA in spinal surgery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available