ArticleBMJ open2019
Tranexamic acid in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis (protocol).
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Intraoperative and Postoperative Blood Cell Salvage Use in Cardiac Surgery with Cardiopulmonary Bypass.Brazilian journal of cardiovascular surgery · 2025Observational
- The Effect of Tranexamic Acid on Estimated Blood Loss and Transfusion Rates in Children with Cerebral Palsy Undergoing Single-Event Multi-Level Surgery, a Retrospective Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Topical administration of tranexamic acid for prevention of postoperative epidural fibrosis: insights from a rabbit laminectomy model.Veterinary research forum : an international quarterly journal · 2025Article
- Successful Case of Double Valve Replacement Surgery Using Autologous Blood Transfusion: A Patient's Autonomy Preserved with Excellent Clinical Outcome.The American journal of case reports · 2024Article
- Effect of tranexamic acid on blood loss reduction in patients undergoing orthognathic surgery under hypotensive anesthesia: a single-center, retrospective, observational study.Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons · 2024Article
- Review
- Five-minute test to prevent postcardiotomy reexploration.JTCVS techniques · 2022Article
- Case Report: Perioperative Management of Combined Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting, Liver and Kidney Transplantation in a Patient With Antiphospholipid Syndrome.Transplantation direct · 2021Article
- Tranexamic acid adverse reactions: a brief summary for internists and emergency doctors.Clinical and molecular allergy : CMA · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBleeding during cardiac surgery is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic with proven efficacy in major surgeries. Current clinical practice guidelines recommend intraoperative use in cardiac procedures. However, several complications have been reported with tranexamic acid including seizures. This review intends to summarise the evidence examining the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS/
designWe will search MEDLINE, Embase, PubMED, ACPJC, CINAHL and the Cochrane trial registry for eligible randomised controlled trials, the search dates for all databases will be from inception until 1 January 2019, investigating the perioperative use of topical and/or intravenous tranexamic acid as a stand-alone antifibrinolytic agent compared with placebo in patients undergoing open cardiac surgery. We categorised outcomes as patient critical or patient important. Selected patient-critical outcomes are: mortality (intensive care unit, hospital and 30-day endpoints), reoperation within 24 hours, postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion of packed red blood cells, myocardial infarction, stroke, pulmonary embolism, bowel infarction, upper or lower limb deep vein thrombosis and seizures. Those outcomes, we perceived as clinical experts to be most patient valued and patients were not involved in outcomes selection process. We will not apply publication date, language, journal or methodological quality restrictions. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify eligible studies using predefined eligibility criteria and then review full reports of all potentially relevant citations. A third reviewer will resolve disagreements if consensus cannot be achieved. We will present the results as relative risk with 95% CIs for dichotomous outcomes and as mean difference or standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes with 95% CIs. We will assess the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018105904.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.