A rationale for universal tranexamic acid in major joint arthroplasty: overall efficacy and impact of risk factors for transfusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tranexamic acid (TXA) therapy is effective in reducing postoperative red blood cell (RBC) transfusion in total joint arthroplasty (TJA), yet uncertainty persists regarding comparative efficacy and safety among specific patient subgroups. We assessed the impact of a universal TXA protocol on RBC transfusion, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb), and adverse outcomes to determine whether TXA is safe and effective in TJA, both overall and in clinically relevant subgroups. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS A retrospective observational study was performed on patients undergoing TJA at our institution spanning 1 year before and after the implementation of a universal protocol to administer intravenous (IV) TXA. The primary outcome was percentage of patients transfused, and secondary outcomes were perioperative Hb and occurrence of adverse events (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, seizure, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and acute kidney injury ). Outcomes were compared in pre‐ and post‐protocol groups with χ 2 analysis. Logistic regression compared risk of transfusion in pre‐ and post‐protocol subgroups of patients with differing risk for transfusion (anemia, body mass index [BMI], and sex). RESULTS No differences were found in baseline patient characteristics across pre‐ and post‐protocol groups (n = 1084 and 912, respectively). TXA use increased from 32.3% to 92.2% while transfusion rates decreased from 10.3% to 4.8% (p < 0.001). Postoperative Day 3 Hb increased from 95.8 to 101.4 g/L (p < 0.001). Logistic regression demonstrated reduced transfusion in post‐protocol subgroups regardless of sex, anemia, or BMI (p < 0.001). No increase in adverse events was observed (p = 0.8451). CONCLUSIONS Universal TXA was associated with a reduction of RBC transfusion, overall and in clinically relevant subgroups, strengthening the rationale for universal therapy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".