Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34913084›Full record

SynthesisCurrent urology reports2021

Is There Any Clinical Benefit for Peri-operative Administration of Tranexamic Acid for Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Panagiotis Kallidonis, Athanasios Vagionis, Konstantinos Pagonis, Angelis Peteinaris, Amelia Pietropaolo, Constantinos Adamou, Evangelos Liatsikos, Thomas Tailly

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current urology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Tranexamic acid for percutaneous nephrolithotomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Panagiotis KallidonisDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece. pkallidonis@yahoo.com.
Athanasios VagionisDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Konstantinos PagonisDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Angelis PeteinarisDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Amelia PietropaoloEndourology and Lithiasis Working Group, Young Academic Urologists, European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Constantinos AdamouDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Evangelos LiatsikosDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Thomas TaillyDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.
University of Patras · GRUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of current systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the efficacy and safety of the administration of tranexamic acid in patients undergoing PCNL. The study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. This systematic review and meta-analysis includes randomized comparative prospective studies. RECENT

findingsThe primary endpoints were the hemoglobin drop, the bleeding complications, and the transfusion rate. Secondary endpoints included the operative time, the stone-free rate, the hospital stay, and the overall complications. Two-thousand five-hundred six publications were screened for this study. Six RCTs (1262 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. As for our primary endpoints, the hemoglobin drop was lower in the tranexamic group than in the control group, with mean difference (MD) of - 0.65 (p < 0.0001); the bleeding complications were rarer in the tranexamic group than in the control group, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.32 (p < 0.00001); and the transfusion rate was lower in the tranexamic group with an OR of 0.34 (p = 0.0007). Concerning the secondary endpoints, the operative time was less in the tranexamic group with an MD of - 10.39 (p < 0.0001), the meta-analysis of the stone-free status data showed no statistical significance between the two groups with an OR of 1.58 (p = 0.09), the hospital stay was significantly less in the tranexamic group with an MD of - 1.38 (p = 0.005), and the overall complications were rarer in the tranexamic group than in the control group with an OR of 0.34 (p = 0.12). The peri-operative use of TA contributes to the reduction of blood loss, bleeding complications, mean operative time, and hospital stay. The use of TA seemed to be safe and well tolerated in patients undergoing PCNL. PROSPERO protocol (Registration number: CRD42019122818).

Indexed as

Nephrolithotomy, PercutaneousTranexamic AcidBlood TransfusionHumansOperative TimeProspective StudiesTranexamic AcidPCNLPercutaneousRenal stonesTranexamic acidUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID34913084
OpenAlexW4200037704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.