AAOS2017: Tranexamic acid appears safe and effective in fracture surgery

Study Type: Meta analysis
OE Level of Evidence: N/A
Journal Level of Evidence: N/A
This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.
Nine studies (randomized controlled trials/cohort studies) were included in this meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in patients undergoing fracture surgery. Total blood loss, transfusion rate, hemoglobin drop, and the incidence of venous thromboembolic complications were analyzed in this meta-analysis. Results demonstrated significantly Please login to view the rest of this report. Please login to view the rest of this report.
Why was this study needed now?
The use of tranexamic acid in major orthopaedic procedures has become common practice. While the efficacy of tranexamic acid has been evaluated extensively in total knee and hip arthroplasty procedures, few trials have assessed its efficacy in fracture repair. A synthesis of available evidence was needed to provide the best estimate of effect for tranexamic acid use in fracture surgery.
What was the principal research question?
In orthopaedic fracture surgery, does the use of tranexamic acid significantly reduce blood loss and transfusion rate, without significantly increasing the incidence of thromboembolic complications?
Data Source: PubMed/OVID was searched for relevant articles published up to March 2016.
Index Terms: Search terms/methods were not stated in the conference abstract.
Study Selection: Eligibility criteria included: a randomized controlled trial or cohort study design that enrolled patients undergoing surgery for fracture and evaluated the efficacy of tranexamic acid. Based on reported results, it appeared that all included studies featured a placebo group. A total of 9 studies, with data from 1048 patients, were selected for final inclusion.
Data Extraction: Details on data extraction were not stated in the conference abstract.
Data Synthesis: Statistical analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-analysis software.
What were the important findings?
What should I remember most?
How will this affect the care of my patients?
The authors responsible for this critical appraisal and ACE Report indicate no potential conflicts of interest relating to the content in the original publication.