ArticleCureus2025
Does Perioperative Subcutaneous Heparin or Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Affect the Rate of Vascular Complications in Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Procedures?
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is a surgical technique commonly used to treat degenerative disk disease in the lower lumbar spine. As the procedure commonly involves retraction of the iliac arteries and veins, potential complications include deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and hemorrhagic vessel injuries. The goal of this retrospective review is to assess whether the use of intraoperative intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA), subcutaneous heparin (SCH), or neither is associated with clinical complications and surgical outcomes. Methods All patients undergoing ALIF from 2015 to 2023 at a tertiary academic medical center were reviewed. Intraoperative use of prothrombotic or anticoagulant and short- and long-term outcomes were assessed. Results One hundred seventy-nine patients were included; there were 81 (45.3%) female patients and an average age of 58.96 ± 13.34 years. Twenty-eight patients received SCH, 34 patients received TXA, and 117 received neither. The use of perioperative SCH or TXA in ALIF procedures did not result in statistically significant differences in complication rates or pain scores. Statistically significant differences were found with the use of coagulative intervention and blood transfusions, with the TXA requiring the fewest transfusions and the no-intervention group requiring the most. Patients receiving TXA were more likely to be discharged home without the need for any other services. Although not statistically significant, there was a trend of decreasing estimated blood loss (EBL) between the coagulation intervention groups, with no intervention having the highest EBL, followed by SCH and TXA. Conclusion The use of perioperative coagulative intervention in ALIF procedures did not result in a significant change in complication rates, hospital stays, or pain outcomes. The TXA group had a trend toward lower blood loss, no patients requiring a blood transfusion, a higher likelihood of being discharged home without any supplemental services, and the best neurologic outcomes. As such, further large and prospective trials should be performed to study the effect of TXA in ALIF patients further to determine whether patients undergoing ALIFs would benefit from TXA administration.
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.