Effectiveness of tranexamic acid for acute traumatic hemorrhage and epistaxis in settings without immediate surgical support: a literature review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Tranexamic acid has been widely used for the management of acute hemorrhage. Although results remain conflicting on its benefits, several more studies have been produced since the first 2010 publication of the CRASH-2 trial. The purpose of this literature review is to examine available evidence on the efficacy of tranexamic acid for acute hemorrhage due to trauma, isolated traumatic brain injury, and epistaxis. Of particular interest is the utility of tranexamic acid in settings without immediate surgical support, such as in certain rural and remote locations of Canada. Methods: A literature review was conducted using the PubMed database as a source for trials comparing the efficacy of tranexamic acid as a means to improve morbidity and mortality from acute hemorrhage due to trauma, traumatic brain injury, and epistaxis. Results: A total of 195 studies were identified from the PubMed database search. After removing duplicates and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, 18 unique studies were included in the review. There were 5 on trauma, 7 on traumatic brain injury, and 6 on epistaxis. All 18 articles were reviewed in detail, but to keep within the scope of this capstone project, a focus on 2 key studies for each topic (trauma, traumatic brain injury, epistaxis) was performed. Although intravenous tranexamic acid administered within 3 hours of injury appeared to reduce 28-day mortality due to trauma, 28-day mortality due to traumatic brain injury and longer-term neurological outcomes at 6 months were not improved for either. Efficacy of topical tranexamic acid for epistaxis management remains conflicting. Conclusions: Tranexamic acid can be a medication used to reduce mortality in the context of acute hemorrhage due to trauma when given intravenously within 3 hours of injury. This can be especially relevant in the prehospital setting, and in rural or remote settings of Canada where there is no immediate surgical support. As there is no mortality or morbidity benefit seen when used for isolated traumatic brain injury, tranexamic acid currently has little role in its management. There is still conflicting evidence as to what further benefit tranexamic acid provides within our current armamentarium when given topically for epistaxis management. As a result, its use for this cannot be recommended for or against at this time.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".