Tranexamic Acid Reduces Perioperative Blood Loss in Adult Patients Having Spinal Fusion Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Spinal reconstructive surgery in adults can be associated with significant blood loss, often requiring allogeneic blood transfusion. The objective of this randomized, prospective, double-blind, multicenter study was to evaluate the efficacy of tranexamic acid (TXA) in reducing perioperative blood loss and transfusion in adult patients having elective posterior thoracic/lumbar instrumented spinal fusion surgery. METHODS: One hundred fifty-one adult patients were randomized to receive either a bolus of 10 mg/kg IV of TXA after induction followed by a maintenance infusion of 1 mg/kg/hr of TXA, or an equivalent volume of placebo (normal saline). The primary outcome was the total perioperative estimated and calculated blood loss intraoperatively and 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes were incidence of allogeneic blood exposure, and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Four patients were withdrawn for identifiable surgical bleeding, therefore 147 patients were included in the analysis. The total estimated and calculated perioperative blood loss was approximately 25% and 30% lower in patients given TXA versus placebo (1592 +/- 1315 mL vs 2138 +/- 1607 mL, P = 0.026; 3079 +/- 2558 vs 4363 +/- 3030, P = 0.017), respectively. There was no difference in the amounts of blood products transfused, and length of stay between the two groups. TXA, surgical duration, and number of vertebrae fused were independent factors related to perioperative blood loss. Predictors for the need for allogeneic red blood cell transfusion were ASA classification, surgical duration and number of levels fused. CONCLUSIONS: TXA significantly reduced the estimated and calculated total amount of perioperative blood loss in adult patients having elective posterior thoracic/lumbar instrumented spinal fusion surgery.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".