• Eur J Anaesthesiol · May 2017

    Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Observational Study

    Aprotinin vs. tranexamic acid in isolated coronary artery bypass surgery: A large multicentre observational study.

    • Elsa Deloge, Julien Amour, Sophie Provenchère, Bertrand Rozec, Bruno Scherrer, and Alexandre Ouattara.
    • From the Department of Anaesthesia and Critical Care II, CHU de Bordeaux, F-33600 Pessac (ED, AO); Univ.Bordeaux, UMR INSERM 1034, Biology of Cardiovascular Diseases, F-33600 Pessac (ED, AO); Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, UMR INSERM 1166, IHU ICAN, and Department of Anaesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (JA); Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Paris (SP); Department of Anaesthesiology and Surgical Intensive Care, Laennec Hospital, Nantes University Hospital, Nantes (BR); and Bruno Scherrer Conseil, Saint Arnoult en Yvelines, France (BS).
    • Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2017 May 1; 34 (5): 280-287.

    BackgroundAprotinin appears to be more efficacious than lysine analogues to reduce bleeding and transfusion of blood products in high-transfusion-risk cardiac surgical patients. However, in isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, the results from head-to-head trials remain less conclusive.ObjectiveOur objective was to compare the efficacies and safety of aprotinin and tranexamic acid (TXA) in patients undergoing isolated on-pump CABG.DesignA multicentre before-and-after study pooling individual data from published trials and unpublished data from three other databases.SettingFour tertiary care teaching hospitals (Haut-Lévêque Hospital in Bordeaux, Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital and Bichat-Claude Bernard Hospital in Paris, and Laennec Hospital in Nantes).PatientsWe included data of 2496 isolated on-pump CABG surgery patients who received either aprotinin between November 2003 and May 2008 (n = 1267) or TXA between November 2007 and November 2013 (n = 1229).Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcome was total blood loss within 24 h after operation. Secondary outcomes were transfusion of blood products, reoperation for bleeding, renal replacement therapy, ICU length of stay and in-hospital mortality.ResultsAdjusted mean (SEM) 24-h blood loss after surgery [483 (11) vs. 634 (11) ml, P < 0.0001] and the proportion of patients requiring intraoperative blood product transfusion (32.7 vs. 46.5%, P = 0.01) were lower in aprotinin-treated patients. No difference was observed with regard to reoperations for bleeding, renal replacement therapy and in-hospital mortality. However, patients receiving aprotinin had a significantly shorter adjusted ICU length of stay.ConclusionIn patients undergoing isolated CABG, aprotinin was more effective than TXA in reducing postoperative blood loss, and no safety concerns were identified. The benefits of aprotinin should be considered when evaluating the risk of major blood loss and transfusion in patients scheduled for isolated CABG surgery.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…