Suppr超能文献

氨甲环酸用于鼻出血患者。

Tranexamic acid for patients with nasal haemorrhage (epistaxis).

作者信息

Joseph Jonathan, Martinez-Devesa Pablo, Bellorini Jenny, Burton Martin J

机构信息

Royal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, 330 Gray's Inn Road, London, UK, WC1X 8DA.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Dec 31;12(12):CD004328. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004328.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Epistaxis (nosebleed) most commonly affects children and the elderly. The majority of episodes are managed at home with simple measures. In more severe cases medical intervention is required to either cauterise the bleeding vessel, or to pack the nose with various materials. Tranexamic acid is used in a number of clinical settings to stop bleeding by preventing clot breakdown (fibrinolysis). It may have a role in the management of epistaxis as an adjunct to standard treatments, reducing the need for further intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of tranexamic acid (oral, intravenous or topical) compared with placebo, no additional intervention or any other haemostatic agent in the management of patients with epistaxis.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register (via CRS Web); Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (via CRS Web); PubMed; Ovid Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 29 October 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of tranexamic acid (in addition to usual care) compared with usual care plus placebo, usual care alone or usual care plus any other haemostatic agent, to control epistaxis in adults or children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The primary outcomes were control of epistaxis: re-bleeding (as measured by the proportion of patients re-bleeding within a period of up to 10 days) and significant adverse effects (seizures, thromboembolic events). Secondary outcomes were control of epistaxis as measured by the time to stop initial bleeding (the proportion of patients whose bleeding is controlled within a period of up to 30 minutes); severity of re-bleeding (as measured by (a) the proportion of patients requiring any further intervention and (b) the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion); length of hospital stay and other adverse effects. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome; this is indicated in italics.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six RCTs (692 participants). The overall risk of bias in the studies was low. Two studies assessed oral administration of tranexamic acid, given regularly over several days, and compared it to placebo. In the other four studies, a single application of topical tranexamic acid was compared with placebo (one study) and a combination of epinephrine and lidocaine or phenylephrine (three studies). All participants were adults.Tranexamic acid versus placeboFor our primary outcome, control of epistaxis: re-bleeding (proportion re-bleeding within 10 days), we were able to pool data from three studies. The pooled result demonstrated a benefit of tranexamic acid compared to placebo, the risk of re-bleeding reducing from 67% to 47% (risk ratio (RR) 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.90; three studies; 225 participants; moderate-quality evidence).When we compared the effects of oral and topical tranexamic acid separately the risk of re-bleeding with oral tranexamic acid reduced from 69% to 49%, RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.96; two studies, 157 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and with topical tranexamic acid it reduced from 66% to 43%, RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.41 to 1.05; single study, 68 participants). We rated the quality of evidence provided by the single study as low, therefore it is uncertain whether topical tranexamic acid is effective in stopping bleeding in the 10-day period after a single application.No study specifically sought to identify and report our primary outcome: significant adverse effects (i.e. seizures, thromboembolic events).The secondary outcome time to stop initial bleeding (proportion with bleeding controlled within 30 minutes) was measured in one study using topical tranexamic acid and there was no evidence of a difference at 30 minutes (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.11; 68 participants; low-quality evidence).No studies reported the proportion of patients requiring any further intervention (e.g. repacking, surgery, embolisation).One study of oral tranexamic acid reported the proportion of patients requiring blood transfusion and found no difference between groups: 5/45 (11%) versus 6/44 (14%) (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.48; 89 participants; low-quality evidence).Two studies reported hospital length of stay. One study reported a significantly shorter stay in the oral tranexamic acid group (mean difference (MD) -1.60 days, 95% CI -2.49 to -0.71; 68 participants). The other study found no evidence of a difference between the groups.Tranexamic acid versus other haemostatic agentsWhen we pooled the data from three studies the proportion of patients whose bleeding stopped within 10 minutes was significantly higher in the topical tranexamic acid group compared to the group receiving another haemostatic agent (70% versus 30%: RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.90 to 2.92; 460 participants) (moderate-quality evidence).Adverse effects across all studiesFive studies recorded 'adverse effects' in a general way. None found any difference between the groups in the occurrence of minor adverse effects (e.g. mild nausea and diarrhoea, 'bad taste' of gel). In one study a patient developed a superficial thrombophlebitis of both legs following discharge, however it is not reported in which group this occurred. No "other serious adverse effect" was reported in any study.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found moderate-quality evidence that there is probably a reduction in the risk of re-bleeding with the use of either oral or topical tranexamic acid in addition to usual care in adult patients with epistaxis, compared to placebo with usual care. However, the quality of evidence relating solely to topical tranexamic acid was low (one study only), so we are uncertain whether or not topical tranexamic acid is effective in stopping bleeding in the 10-day period after a single application. We found moderate-quality evidence that topical tranexamic acid is probably better than other topical agents in stopping bleeding in the first 10 minutes.There have been only three RCTs on this subject since 1995. Since then there have been significant changes in nasal cauterisation and packing techniques (for example, techniques including nasal endoscopy and more invasive approaches such as endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation). New trials would inform us about the effectiveness of tranexamic acid in light of these developments.

摘要

背景

鼻出血在儿童和老年人中最为常见。大多数鼻出血事件可通过简单措施在家中处理。在更严重的情况下,则需要进行医学干预,如烧灼出血血管或用各种材料填塞鼻腔。氨甲环酸在许多临床环境中用于通过防止血凝块分解(纤维蛋白溶解)来止血。它可能作为标准治疗的辅助手段在鼻出血的治疗中发挥作用,减少进一步干预的需求。

目的

确定与安慰剂、不进行额外干预或任何其他止血剂相比,氨甲环酸(口服、静脉注射或局部应用)在鼻出血患者管理中的效果。

检索方法

Cochrane耳鼻喉科信息专家检索了Cochrane耳鼻喉科注册库(通过CRS网络);对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)(通过CRS网络);PubMed;Ovid Embase;CINAHL;科学引文索引;ClinicalTrials.gov;ICTRP以及其他已发表和未发表试验的来源。检索日期为2018年10月29日。

入选标准

将氨甲环酸(除常规护理外)与常规护理加安慰剂、单纯常规护理或常规护理加任何其他止血剂进行比较的随机对照试验(RCT),以控制成人或儿童的鼻出血。

数据收集与分析

我们采用了Cochrane预期的标准方法程序。主要结局是鼻出血的控制:再次出血(通过在长达10天的时间内再次出血的患者比例来衡量)和严重不良反应(癫痫发作、血栓栓塞事件)。次要结局包括通过停止初始出血的时间来衡量的鼻出血控制情况(在长达30分钟的时间内出血得到控制的患者比例);再次出血的严重程度(通过(a)需要任何进一步干预的患者比例和(b)需要输血的患者比例来衡量);住院时间长度和其他不良反应。我们使用GRADE来评估每个结局的证据质量;这在文中用斜体表示。

主要结果

我们纳入了6项RCT(692名参与者)。这些研究中的总体偏倚风险较低。两项研究评估了连续几天定期口服氨甲环酸,并将其与安慰剂进行比较。在其他四项研究中,将单次局部应用氨甲环酸与安慰剂(一项研究)以及肾上腺素和利多卡因或去氧肾上腺素的组合(三项研究)进行了比较。所有参与者均为成年人。

氨甲环酸与安慰剂

对于我们的主要结局,鼻出血的控制:再次出血(10天内再次出血的比例),我们能够汇总三项研究的数据。汇总结果表明,与安慰剂相比,氨甲环酸有好处,再次出血的风险从67%降至47%(风险比(RR)0.71,95%置信区间(CI)0.56至0.90;三项研究;225名参与者;中等质量证据)。

当我们分别比较口服和局部应用氨甲环酸的效果时,口服氨甲环酸的再次出血风险从69%降至49%,RR 0.73(95% CI 0.55至0.96;两项研究,157名参与者;中等质量证据),局部应用氨甲环酸时从66%降至43%,RR 0.66(95% CI 0.41至1.05;单项研究,68名参与者)。我们将单项研究提供的证据质量评为低,因此不确定单次局部应用氨甲环酸在10天内是否能有效止血。

没有研究专门试图识别和报告我们的主要结局

严重不良反应(即癫痫发作、血栓栓塞事件)。

次要结局停止初始出血的时间(30分钟内出血得到控制的比例)在一项使用局部应用氨甲环酸的研究中进行了测量,在30分钟时没有差异的证据(RR 0.79,95% CI 0.56至1.11;68名参与者;低质量证据)。

没有研究报告需要任何进一步干预(如重新填塞、手术、栓塞)的患者比例。

一项关于口服氨甲环酸的研究报告了需要输血的患者比例,发现两组之间没有差异:5/45(11%)对6/44(14%)(RR 0.81,95% CI 0.27至2.48;89名参与者;低质量证据)。

两项研究报告了住院时间长度。一项研究报告口服氨甲环酸组的住院时间明显更短(平均差异(MD)-1.60天,95% CI -2.49至-0.71;68名参与者)。另一项研究未发现两组之间有差异的证据。

氨甲环酸与其他止血剂

当我们汇总三项研究的数据时,局部应用氨甲环酸组在10分钟内出血停止的患者比例明显高于接受另一种止血剂的组(70%对30%:RR 2.35,95% CI 1.90至2.92;460名参与者)(中等质量证据)。

所有研究中的不良反应

五项研究以一般方式记录了“不良反应”。没有一项研究发现两组在轻微不良反应(如轻度恶心和腹泻、凝胶的“不良味道”)的发生上有任何差异。在一项研究中,一名患者出院后出现了双腿浅表性血栓性静脉炎,但未报告该事件发生在哪个组。任何研究中均未报告“其他严重不良反应”。

作者结论

我们发现中等质量证据表明,与常规护理加安慰剂相比,在成年鼻出血患者的常规护理基础上使用口服或局部应用氨甲环酸可能会降低再次出血的风险。然而,仅与局部应用氨甲环酸相关的证据质量较低(仅有一项研究),因此我们不确定单次局部应用氨甲环酸在10天内是否能有效止血。我们发现中等质量证据表明,局部应用氨甲环酸在最初10分钟内止血可能优于其他局部用药。

自1995年以来,关于这个主题仅有三项RCT。从那时起,鼻腔烧灼和填塞技术有了显著变化(例如,包括鼻内镜检查的技术以及更具侵入性的方法,如内镜下蝶腭动脉结扎)。新的试验将根据这些进展告知我们氨甲环酸的有效性。

相似文献

1
Tranexamic acid for patients with nasal haemorrhage (epistaxis).
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Dec 31;12(12):CD004328. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004328.pub3.
2
Tranexamic acid for the reduction of bleeding during functional endoscopic sinus surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Feb 21;2(2):CD012843. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012843.pub2.
3
Drugs to reduce bleeding and transfusion in major open vascular or endovascular surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Feb 17;2(2):CD013649. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013649.pub2.
5
Topical application of tranexamic acid for the reduction of bleeding.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 23;2013(7):CD010562. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010562.pub2.
6
Systemic and topical antibiotics for chronic rhinosinusitis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 26;4(4):CD011994. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011994.pub2.
7
Tranexamic acid for preventing postpartum haemorrhage after caesarean section.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Nov 13;11(11):CD016278. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD016278.
8
Tranexamic acid for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Nov 21;2014(11):CD006640. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006640.pub3.
9
Topical and systemic antifungal therapy for chronic rhinosinusitis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 10;9(9):CD012453. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012453.pub2.
10
Intranasal steroids versus placebo or no intervention for chronic rhinosinusitis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 26;4(4):CD011996. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011996.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Application and research progress of tranexamic acid in the perioperative period of posterior lumbar interbody fusion.
Front Med (Lausanne). 2025 Aug 8;12:1612281. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1612281. eCollection 2025.
2
A goat experimental epistaxis model: Hemostatic effect of stop nosebleeds device.
PLoS One. 2025 Jun 10;20(6):e0324727. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324727. eCollection 2025.
4
A comparative study of the local effect of tranexamic acid and phenylephrine on the amount of bleeding in rhinoplasty: A randomized clinical trial.
Caspian J Intern Med. 2024 Sep 7;15(4):690-696. doi: 10.22088/cjim.154.690. eCollection 2024 Fall.
6
Prospective review of 188 cases of epistaxis presenting to the emergency department: Etiology and outcome.
J Family Med Prim Care. 2023 Nov;12(11):2721-2726. doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_889_23. Epub 2023 Nov 21.
7
Tranexamic acid for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Oct 26;10(10):CD015122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD015122.pub2.
8
Epistaxis Treatment Options: Literature Review.
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023 Sep;75(3):2235-2244. doi: 10.1007/s12070-023-03824-z. Epub 2023 May 8.
10
Hypertensive Urgency and Anterior Epistaxis Caused by Antihypertensive Medication Noncompliance: A Case Report.
Open Access Emerg Med. 2023 Feb 3;15:47-51. doi: 10.2147/OAEM.S400167. eCollection 2023.

本文引用的文献

1
Tranexamic acid for the reduction of bleeding during functional endoscopic sinus surgery.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Feb 21;2(2):CD012843. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012843.pub2.
2
Haematological factors in the management of adult epistaxis: systematic review.
J Laryngol Otol. 2017 Dec;131(12):1093-1107. doi: 10.1017/S0022215117002067.
3
Epistaxis 2016: national audit of management.
J Laryngol Otol. 2017 Dec;131(12):1131-1141. doi: 10.1017/S002221511700202X.
6
Comparison of the Effect of Dexamethasone and Tranexamic Acid, Separately or in Combination on Post-Rhinoplasty Edema and Ecchymosis.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2018 Feb;42(1):246-252. doi: 10.1007/s00266-017-0969-x. Epub 2017 Oct 4.
7
Efficacy of tranexamic acid on side effects of rhinoplasty: A randomized double-blind study.
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2017 Jun;45(6):897-902. doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2017.03.001. Epub 2017 Mar 21.
10
Tranexamic acid in epistaxis: a systematic review.
Clin Otolaryngol. 2016 Dec;41(6):771-776. doi: 10.1111/coa.12645. Epub 2016 Mar 18.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验