Stejskal P, Trnka Š, Hrabálek L, Wanek T, Jablonský J, Novák V
Neurochirurgická klinika Fakultní nemocnice Olomouc a Lékařské fakulty Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci.
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2023;90(3):176-180.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Tranexamic acid as a haemostatic agent is commonly used in multiple medical branches. Over the last decade, there has been a steep rise in the number of studies evaluating its effect, i.e. blood loss reduction in specific surgical procedures. The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of tranexamic acid on reducing intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood loss into the drain, total blood loss, transfusion requirements, and development of symptomatic wound hematoma in conventional single-level lumbar decompression and stabilization. MATERIAL AND METHODS The study included patients who had undergone a traditional open lumbar spine surgery in the form of single-level decompression and stabilisation. The patients were randomized into two groups. The study group received a 15 mg/kg dose of tranexamic acid intravenously during the induction of anaesthesia and then again 6 hours later. No tranexamic acid was administered to the control group. In all patients, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative blood loss into the drain, and therefore also total blood loss, transfusion requirements and potential development of a symptomatic postoperative wound hematoma requiring surgical evacuation were recorded. The data of the two groups were compared. RESULTS The cohort includes 162 patients, 81 in the study group and the same number in the control group. In the intraoperative blood loss assessment, no statistically significant difference between the two groups was observed; 430 (190-910) mL vs. 435 (200-900) mL. In case of post-operative drain blood loss, a statistically significantly lower volume was reported after the tranexamic acid administration; 405 (180-750) mL vs. 490 (210-820) mL. When evaluating the total blood loss, a statistically significant difference was also confirmed, namely in favour of the tranexamic acid; 860 (470-1410) mL vs. 910 (500- 1420) mL. The reduction of total blood loss did not result in a difference in the number of administered transfusions; transfusions were given to 4 patients in each group. A postoperative wound hematoma requiring surgical evacuation developed in 1 patient in the group with the tranexamic acid and in 4 patients in the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant with respect to the insufficient group size. No patient in our study experienced complications associated with tranexamic acid application. DISCUSSION The beneficial effect of tranexamic acid on reducing blood loss in lumbar spine surgeries has already been confirmed by numerous meta-analyses. The question remains in what types of procedures, at what dose and route of administration its effect is significant. To date, most of the studies have explored its effect in multi-level decompressions and stabilizations. Raksakietisak et al., for instance, report significant reduction in total blood loss from 900 (160, 4150) mL to 600 (200, 4750) mL following an intravenous injection of 2 bolus doses of 15 mg/kg tranexamic acid. In less extensive spinal surgeries, the effect of tranexamic acid may not be that distinct. In our study of single-level decompressions and stabilizations, no reduction in the actual intraoperative bleeding was confirmed at the given dosage. Its effect was seen only in the postoperative period in a significant reduction of blood loss into the drain, thus also in the total blood loss, although the difference between 910 (500, 1420) mL and 860 (470, 1410) mL was not that significant. CONCLUSIONS By intravenous application of tranexamic acid in 2 bolus doses in single-level decompression and stabilization of the lumbar spine a statistically significant reduction in postoperative blood loss into the drain and also total blood loss was confirmed. The reduction in the actual intraoperative blood loss was not statistically significant. No difference was observed in the number of administered transfusions. Following the tranexamic acid administration, a lower number of postoperative symptomatic wound hematomas was recorded, but the difference was not statistically significant. Key words: tranexamic acid, spinal surgeries, blood loss, postoperative hematoma.
研究目的 氨甲环酸作为一种止血剂,在多个医学分支中普遍使用。在过去十年中,评估其效果(即特定外科手术中减少失血)的研究数量急剧增加。我们研究的目的是评估氨甲环酸在传统单节段腰椎减压和稳定手术中对减少术中失血、术后引流管失血、总失血量、输血需求以及症状性伤口血肿形成的影响。
材料与方法 本研究纳入了接受单节段减压和稳定手术这种传统开放式腰椎手术的患者。患者被随机分为两组。研究组在麻醉诱导期间静脉注射15mg/kg剂量的氨甲环酸,6小时后再次注射。对照组未给予氨甲环酸。记录所有患者的术中失血量、术后引流管失血量,进而记录总失血量、输血需求以及需要手术引流的症状性术后伤口血肿的潜在形成情况。比较两组数据。
结果 该队列包括162例患者,研究组81例,对照组81例。在术中失血量评估中,两组之间未观察到统计学上的显著差异;分别为430(190 - 910)mL和435(200 - 900)mL。在术后引流管失血量方面,氨甲环酸给药后报告的量在统计学上显著更低;分别为405(180 - 750)mL和490(210 - 820)mL。在评估总失血量时,也证实了统计学上的显著差异,即有利于氨甲环酸组;分别为860(470 - 1410)mL和910(500 - 1420)mL。总失血量的减少并未导致输血数量的差异;每组有4例患者接受了输血。氨甲环酸组有1例患者出现需要手术引流的术后伤口血肿,对照组有4例患者出现,但由于样本量不足,差异无统计学意义。我们研究中没有患者出现与氨甲环酸应用相关的并发症。
讨论 氨甲环酸在腰椎手术中减少失血的有益作用已被众多荟萃分析所证实。问题在于在何种类型的手术、何种剂量和给药途径下其效果显著。迄今为止,大多数研究探讨了其在多节段减压和稳定手术中的效果。例如,Raksakietisak等人报告,静脉注射2次15mg/kg剂量的氨甲环酸后,总失血量从900(160,4150)mL显著减少至600(200,4750)mL。在范围较小的脊柱手术中,氨甲环酸的效果可能不那么明显。在我们关于单节段减压和稳定手术的研究中,在给定剂量下未证实实际术中出血减少。其效果仅在术后阶段表现为引流管失血量显著减少,进而总失血量也减少,尽管910(500,1420)mL和860(470,1410)mL之间的差异并不显著。
结论 在腰椎单节段减压和稳定手术中静脉注射2次大剂量氨甲环酸,证实术后引流管失血量和总失血量在统计学上显著减少。实际术中失血量的减少无统计学意义。输血数量无差异。氨甲环酸给药后,术后症状性伤口血肿的数量记录较少,但差异无统计学意义。
氨甲环酸;脊柱手术;失血;术后血肿