Reducing transfusion while preserving Canada's blood supply: use of tranexamic acid in major non-cardiac surgeries at high-risk of transfusion
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) inhibits fibrinolysis and has been shown to consistently reduce red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in cardiac and orthopedic surgery, where it is now incorporated into standard of care. Its efficacy and safety in other major surgeries at high risk of RBC transfusion is largely unknown. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to inform best practice. If TXA reduces RBC transfusion in this diverse surgical population, it is expected that this inexpensive and widely available medication will be incorporated into routine surgical care. OBJECTIVES: The overall objective was to inform the design and conduct of a registry-based RCT of TXA use to reduce RBC transfusion in major non-cardiac surgery. Specifically, we aimed to define a surgical population at high risk of RBC transfusion, evaluate real-world TXA use and variability in this at-risk population, examine TXA effectiveness, efficacy and safety in our at-risk surgical population and validate key transfusion variables critical to the planned RCT. METHODS: To evaluate surgery-specific RBC transfusion risk and TXA use we completed retrospective cohort studies of adult patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery at 5 Canadian hospitals between January 2014 and December 2016. Variability in TXA use was further characterized using multivariable logistic regression analyses in 3 common orthopedic surgeries with higher rates of RBC transfusion (>5%) and TXA utilization (>10%). Real-world TXA effectiveness was studied using propensity analysis. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate TXA efficacy and safety. Agreement between RBC transfusion variables was assessed by comparing different measures of RBC transfusion in the patient record, discharge abstract database and transfusion databases. RESULTS: We identified 85 unique non-cardiac surgeries with an RBC transfusion rate ≥ 5%. We observed that prophylactic use of TXA varies widely according to surgical subtype, with limited use outside of orthopedic and spine surgery. We noted that TXA was most commonly administered as a bolus, with a median total dose of 1 gram. Variability in TXA use was higher among surgeries where TXA use was lower. Propensity analysis resulted in mixed results for TXA effectiveness to reduce RBC transfusion among 3 orthopedic surgeries, although methodologic limitations precluded robust interpretation of these results. We meta-analyzed 69 RCTs of TXA use in non-cardiac surgeries at increased risk for RBC transfusion, and found that TXA reduces both the proportion of patients transfused RBCs, as well as the volume of RBCs transfused. TXA use was not associated with differences in deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, although effect estimates were limited by lack of systematic screening and short duration of follow-up. Lastly, there was excellent agreement for documentation of RBC exposure between the patient record and transfusion databases, although agreement decreased with increasing number of RBC units transfused. CONCLUSION: This thesis has comprehensively informed the design and conduct of an RCT evaluating TXA use in non-cardiac surgeries at increased risk for RBC transfusion by informing trial inclusion criteria, equipoise, TXA dosing, outcomes, feasibility and sample size calculations. This trial has the potential to change the standard of care in perioperative medicine in Canada and around the world.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,039 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».