SynthesisAesthetic plastic surgery2025
Intravenous Versus Subcutaneous Tranexamic Acid in Liposuction: A Comparative Analysis of Efficacy and Safety.
Synthesis in Aesthetic plastic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiposuction is among the most carried-out aesthetic procedures in the world and is usually associated with considerable intraoperative blood loss. Tranexamic acid is an antifibrinolytic agent commonly used to minimize blood loss during surgery. However, there is scant evidence regarding the comparative efficacy and safety of intravenous administration versus subcutaneous administration during liposuction.
methodsPRISMA guidelines were followed for this systematic review and meta-analysis. A total of 10 studies that investigated TXA in liposuction published from 2000 to 2024 were identified from the overall search across PubMed, Google Scholar, and Ovid. Main outcomes evaluated the changes in hematologic parameters (hemoglobin and hematocrit), perioperative blood loss, and postoperative complications. Random-effects models and network meta-analyses comparing IV and SC routes of administration were conducted.
resultsTXA significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss and improved postoperative hematologic stability. IV TXA proved to be more effective with a decrease in hematocrit change than SC (MD - 2.43, 95% CI [- 3.84, - 1.03]) and placebo (MD - 3.06, 95% CI [- 4.36, - 1.76]), while SC TXA showed a significant improvement in postoperative hemoglobin levels (MD 0.54, 95% CI [0.07, 1.01]). Both routes were associated with low complication rates, and no thromboembolic event was noted in either group.
conclusionTXA is effective in reducing blood loss during liposuction, with IV administration showing greater hematologic stabilization. SC administration remains a safe and viable alternative. Further high-quality trials are needed to refine dosing strategies and explore long-term outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
40855024What 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.