Intravenous versus Intra-Articular Tranexamic Acid in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomised Double Blinded Non-Inferiority Trial

A. Hasan, D. Campbell, P. Lewis
{"title":"Intravenous versus Intra-Articular Tranexamic Acid in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomised Double Blinded Non-Inferiority Trial","authors":"A. Hasan, D. Campbell, P. Lewis","doi":"10.15438/RR.11.1.245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been shown to be effective in reducing post-operative blood loss after hip replacement surgery. Clinicians can be reluctant to administer intravenous (IV) TXA to high risk patients and intra-articular (IA) administration has been proposed as an alternative mode of delivery. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of IV versus IA administration of TXA. This prospective, double blinded, randomised non-inferiority trial, compared 69 patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) who received either 3 doses of 15mg/kg of IV TXA or 3 g of IA TXA after capsular closure. The primary outcomes were change in Hb and the rate of blood transfusion. The secondary outcome was the rate of VTE. Results: The mean haemoglobin level change from pre-operative to day 1 post-operative for the IV group was 26.7g/L and for IA group was 27.3g/L. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups (p=0.82). No patients required a transfusion or developed a VTE. Conclusions: IA administration of TXA can be equally effective as IV in the reduction of blood loss and the prevention of post-operative anaemia in primary THA. Background","PeriodicalId":20884,"journal":{"name":"Reconstructive Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reconstructive Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15438/RR.11.1.245","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been shown to be effective in reducing post-operative blood loss after hip replacement surgery. Clinicians can be reluctant to administer intravenous (IV) TXA to high risk patients and intra-articular (IA) administration has been proposed as an alternative mode of delivery. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of IV versus IA administration of TXA. This prospective, double blinded, randomised non-inferiority trial, compared 69 patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) who received either 3 doses of 15mg/kg of IV TXA or 3 g of IA TXA after capsular closure. The primary outcomes were change in Hb and the rate of blood transfusion. The secondary outcome was the rate of VTE. Results: The mean haemoglobin level change from pre-operative to day 1 post-operative for the IV group was 26.7g/L and for IA group was 27.3g/L. No statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups (p=0.82). No patients required a transfusion or developed a VTE. Conclusions: IA administration of TXA can be equally effective as IV in the reduction of blood loss and the prevention of post-operative anaemia in primary THA. Background
初次全髋关节置换术中静脉注射与关节内注射氨甲环酸:一项前瞻性随机双盲非效性试验
背景:氨甲环酸(TXA)已被证明能有效减少髋关节置换术后的术后失血。临床医生可能不愿意给高危患者静脉注射(IV)TXA,关节内注射(IA)已被提议作为一种替代分娩方式。本研究旨在比较静脉注射与IA给药TXA的疗效。这项前瞻性、双盲、随机非劣效性试验比较了69名接受原发性全髋关节置换术(THA)的患者,这些患者在包膜闭合后接受了3剂15mg/kg静脉注射TXA或3 g IA TXA。主要结果是Hb和输血率的变化。次要结果是VTE的发生率。结果:静脉注射组术前至术后第1天的平均血红蛋白水平变化为26.7g/L,IA组为27.3g/L。两组之间没有统计学显著差异(p=0.82)。没有患者需要输血或发生VTE。结论:TXA的IA给药与IV给药在减少原发性THA患者的失血和预防术后贫血方面同样有效。背景
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信