Comparison effect of intravenous tranexamic acid and misoprostol for postpartum haemorrhage

Tranexamic acid for the prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage in resource-limited settings: a literature review

Introduction

Postpartum haemorrhage is a major cause of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Early recognition and appropriate treatment are crucial for managing postpartum haemorrhage.

Objectives

This literature review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of tranexamic acid in the prevention and treatment of postpartum haemorrhage in resource-limited settings.

Search methods

This literature review was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A computerized systematic search of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases using a combination of the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms for PubMed: [(obstetric haemorrhage OR postpartum haemorrhage OR massive obstetric haemorrhage) AND (tranexamic acid OR antifibrinolytic drugs) AND (prophylaxis OR prevention) AND (management OR treatment) AND (resource-limited settings OR resource-limited area OR developing countries)] to find articles published in English since 2010.

Selection criteria

Studies on the obstetric population who underwent vaginal or caesarean delivery, comparing the use of tranexamic acid versus placebo (or no treatment) for treatment (or prevention) of postpartum haemorrhage with the outcome of postpartum haemorrhage rate, blood transfusion requirements, uterotonics requirements, hysterectomy, or mortality were included.

Result

In total, 5315 articles were identified. Following the elimination of duplicates, the methodological quality of 15 studies was evaluated independently, with eligibility determined based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as outcome variables. Finally, eight articles were included in the review.

Conclusion

This review provides evidence that the administration of tranexamic acid has the potential to decrease the need for blood transfusion, incidence of postpartum haemorrhage, demand for supplementary uterotonics, and maternal morbidity and mortality with marginal adverse effects. Healthcare systems must develop and implement interventions that involve the use of tranexamic acid for the treatment of postpartum haemorrhage in resource-limited settings.

Tranexamic acid versus misoprostol for management of postpartum hemorrhage: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To conduct the first-ever systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the antihemorrhagic utility and safety of tranexamic acid (TXA) versus misoprostol for management (prevention and/or treatment) of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH).

METHODS

Six databases were screened from inception until May 2023 and updated in September 2023. The RCTs were assessed for quality according to the Cochrane's risk of bias tool. The endpoints were summarized as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs with 2121 patients (TXA = 1061 and misoprostol = 1060) were analyzed. There was no significant difference between TXA and misoprostol groups regarding the mean intraoperative blood loss (n = 9 RCTs, MD = 17.32 ml, 95% CI [-40.43, 75.07], p = 0.56), mean change in hemoglobin (n = 6 RCTs, MD = 0.11 mg/dl, 95% CI [-0.1, 0.31], p = 0.30), mean hospital stay (n = 2 RCTs, MD = -0.3 day, 95% CI [-0.61, 0.01], p = 0.06), blood transfusion rate (n = 4 RCTs, RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.16, 1.47], p = 0.2), and rate of additional uterotonic agents (n = 4 RCTs, RR = 1.05, 95% CI [0.72, 1.53], p = 0.81). Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis showed robustness of the results, and there was no evidence of publication bias. Regarding safety endpoints, there was no significant difference between both groups regarding the rates of minor side effects, such as diarrhea, fever, nausea, and vomiting. No patient developed thromboembolic events in the TXA group.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant antihemorrhagic efficacy between adjunct TXA and misoprostol for the management of PPH. The safety profile was comparable between both agents.

WITHDRAWN: The Effect of Preoperative Intravenous Tranexamic Acid Versus Rectal Misoprostol in Reducing Blood Loss During and After Elective Cesarean Delivery in Primigravida: A Double-Blinded, Randomized, Comparative-Placebo Trial

The publisher regrets that this article has been temporarily removed. A replacement will appear as soon as possible in which the reason for the removal of the article will be specified, or the article will be reinstated. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at: https://www.elsevier.com/about/policies/article-withdrawal.

Prophylactic effect of rectal and sublingual misoprostol on postpartum hemorrhage in mothers with preeclampsia following cesarean section surgery; a double-blind randomized controlled trial

Background

Postpartum hemorrhage is one of the three major causes of maternal morbidity and mortality, so delay in the diagnosis and proper management of postpartum hemorrhage is of great importance. The present study aimed to determine the prophylactic effect of misoprostol on postpartum hemorrhage in patients with preeclampsia.

Methods

This was a double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial performed on 128 pregnant women with preeclampsia undergoing cesarean section in Kamali hospital in Karaj. After cesarean delivery, immediately after clamping the umbilicus, the first group was administered 400 μg of rectal misoprostol and the second group was given 400 μg of sublingual misoprostol. The third group (control) was given 30 units of oxytocin during surgery and within 12 h after surgery, respectively. Hemoglobin and hematocrit were measured 24 h later. The estimated bleeding rate by the physician, the need for additional medication to control bleeding, and the amounts of hemoglobin and hematocrit in the first 24 h were compared in the three groups. Finally, the obtained information was entered into SPSS version 21 and analyzed using statistical tests.

Results

The mean hemoglobin and hematocrit levels 6 and 12 h after cesarean section were significantly lower in the oxytocin group than in the sublingual and rectal misoprostol groups (Hemoglobin level (mg/dl) for oxytocin group 10.39 ± 0.73 and 9.53 ± 1.09 vs. sublingual misoprostol 11.05 ± 0.71 and 10.39 ± 0.84 vs. rectal misoprostol 10.92 ± 0.85 and 10 ± 1.01; hematocrit level for Hemoglobin level (%) for oxytocin group 31.27 ± 2.29 and 28.64 ± 2.93 vs. sublingual misoprostol 33.09 ± 2.20 and 31.05 ± 2.37 vs. rectal misoprostol 32.54 ± 2.7 and 29.92 ± 2.86) (p < 0.005). The mean estimation of visual bleeding in the oxytocin group was higher than the other three groups, followed by the rectal and the sublingual groups, respectively. However, there was no significant difference between the three groups regarding visual bleeding. There was no significant difference in hemoglobin and hematocrit between the two groups of sublingual and rectal misoprostol before and 6 and 12 h after the surgery (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

It seems that sublingual or rectal misoprostol administration along with oxytocin is associated with a reduction in postpartum cesarean section bleeding compared to oxytocin administration alone.

•

Hemoglobin level 6 and 12 h after cesarean section is significantly lower in the oxytocin group compared to the sublingual misoprostol group.

•

Sublingual or rectal misoprostol administration along with oxytocin is associated with a reduction in postpartum cesarean section bleeding.

•

Hemoglobin level 6 and 12 h after cesarean section is significantly lower in the oxytocin group compared to the rectal misoprostol group.

A randomised controlled trial of tranexamic acid versus misoprostol in reducing blood loss during caesarean section

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of intravenous tranexamic acid versus rectal misoprostol in decreasing intraoperative blood loss during caesarean section (C/S).

DESIGN AND SETTING

Randomised controlled study involving pregnant women undergoing C/S at Alex Ekwueme Federal University Teaching Hospital, Abakaliki in Nigeria.

PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Five hundred and fourteen women undergoing elective C/S were assigned randomly (257 patients per group) to receive either pre-operative 1000 µg rectal misoprostol or 1000mg intravenous tranexamic acid after spinal anaesthesia. Data from 248 patients were analysed in the misoprostol group, while data from 250 patients were analysed in the tranexamic acid group. Sixteen patients were excluded from analysis; nine had incompletely filled proforma, while seven were lost to follow-up.

MAIN OUTCOME

Intraoperative blood loss.

RESULTS

The mean intraoperative blood loss was not significantly different between the misoprostol group and the tranexamic acid group (547 ± 183.75ml vs. 551.66 ± 21.74ml, P = 0.157). The mean difference in pack cell volume (PCV) changes was not significant between the groups (2.41±0.95% vs. 2.36±0.56%, P = 0.474). The side effects profile was similar for both groups except for shivering, which was statistically higher among the misoprostol group (RR = 0.70; 95%CI 0.40 - 0.91, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Intravenous tranexamic acid was comparable to rectal misoprostol in the reduction of blood loss during C/S. Tranexamic acid could act as a good alternative to misoprostol for prophylaxis for blood loss during elective C/S.

FUNDING

None declared.

Tranexamic acid for the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage in women undergoing cesarean delivery: an updated meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of prophylactic tranexamic acid administration vs standard uterotonic agents alone among women undergoing cesarean delivery.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar were systematically searched from inception to June 30, 2021.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing intravenous tranexamic acid administration with placebo in women undergoing cesarean delivery and receiving standard prophylactic uterotonic agents were held eligible.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

The risk of bias of individual studies was appraised with the Risk of Bias 2 tool. Meta-analysis was conducted by fitting random-effects models using restricted maximum likelihood. Subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of country, protocol availability, double-blinding, risk of bias, sample size, and tranexamic acid dose. A 1-stage meta-analysis was performed as a sensitivity analysis. The credibility of outcomes was appraised with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Overall, 36 studies with 10,659 women were included. Tranexamic acid administration was associated with significantly lower total blood loss (mean difference, -189.44 mL; 95% confidence intervals, -218.63 to -160.25), lower hemoglobin drop (mean difference, 8.22%; 95% confidence interval, 5.54-10.90), decreased risk of blood loss of >1000 mL (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.22-0.60), transfusion requirement (odds ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.65), and need of additional uterotonics (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.52). Subgroup analysis indicated a greater effect of tranexamic acid on total blood loss reduction in low-middle income countries. The outcomes remained stable by separately evaluating women at low bleeding risk. The 1-stage meta-analysis demonstrated similar outcomes with the primary analysis. The quality of evidence was judged to be moderate regarding total blood loss and hemoglobin percentage change and low for the other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggested that prophylactic tranexamic acid administration is effective among women undergoing cesarean delivery in lowering postpartum blood loss and limiting hemoglobin drop. Further research is needed to test its efficacy in high-risk populations and verify its safety profile.

Tranexamic Acid Use in the Postpartum Period Since the WOMAN Trial: A retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the use of tranexamic acid (TXA) in postpartum patients since the WOMAN trial.

METHODS

A retrospective recrods review was conducted from May 2017 to March 2020 at a tertiary care centre to identify all patients who received TXA for postpartum bleeding. The primary outcome was to identify the proportion of patients who received TXA as per World Health Organization guidelines using the results of the WOMAN trial.

RESULTS

A total of 231 patients were included in our analysis. Use increased over time with 18 patients in 2017, 51 in 2018, and 134 in 2019 receiving TXA. In all, 203 patients (87.9%) received TXA within recommended guidelines, and these patients were less likely to require surgery or interventional radiology (12.3% vs. 42.9%, P < 0.001) or blood transfusion (23.6% vs. 42.9%, P = 0.030), and they had a lower likelihood of overall adverse events (LR 1.62 (1.6) vs. 2.60 (2.0), P = 0.024). TXA was commonly used as the first-line agent for postpartum bleeding (48.9% of patients), and was administered at cesarean section (77.0%) and when estimated blood loss did not meet criteria for "true" postpartum hemorrhage (41.6% of patients). Use of TXA as the first medication was associated with fewer adverse outcomes overall than misoprostol (P = 0.035). A shorter time to administration of the first medication was associated with shorter postpartum admission time (P = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of patients received TXA within guidelines and experience fewer adverse outcomes. Further study is needed to identify the best order of TXA administration with additional uterotonics and whether TXA should be used prophylactically in some groups for postpartum bleeding.

Tranexamic acid for the prevention and treatment of bleeding in surgery, trauma and bleeding disorders: a narrative review

OBJECTIVES

We review the evidence for tranexamic acid (TXA) for the treatment and prevention of bleeding caused by surgery, trauma and bleeding disorders. We highlight therapeutic areas where evidence is lacking and discuss safety issues, particularly the concern regarding thrombotic complications.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in PubMed and the Cochrane Library to identify clinical trials, safety reports and review articles.

FINDINGS

TXA reduces bleeding in patients with menorrhagia, and in patients undergoing caesarian section, myomectomy, hysterectomy, orthopedic surgery, cardiac surgery, orthognathic surgery, rhinoplasty, and prostate surgery. For dental extractions in patients with bleeding disorders or taking antithrombotic drugs, as well as in cases of idiopathic epistaxis, tonsillectomy, liver transplantation and resection, nephrolithotomy, skin cancer surgery, burn wounds and skin grafting, there is moderate evidence that TXA is effective for reducing bleeding. TXA was not effective in reducing bleeding in traumatic brain injury and upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. TXA reduces mortality in patients suffering from trauma and postpartum hemorrhage. For many of these indications, there is no consensus about the optimal TXA dose. With certain dosages and with certain indications TXA can cause harm, such as an increased risk of seizures after high TXA doses with brain injury and cardiac surgery, and an increased mortality after delayed administration of TXA for trauma events or postpartum hemorrhage. Whereas most trials did not signal an increased risk for thrombotic events, some trials reported an increased rate of thrombotic complications with the use of TXA for gastro-intestinal bleeding and trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

TXA has well-documented beneficial effects in many clinical indications. Identifying these indications and the optimal dose and timing to minimize risk of seizures or thromboembolic events is work in progress.

Uterotonic agents for first-line treatment of postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH), defined as a blood loss of 500 mL or more after birth, is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that all women giving birth should receive a prophylactic uterotonic agent. Despite the routine administration of a uterotonic agent for prevention, PPH remains a common complication causing one-quarter of all maternal deaths globally. When prevention fails and PPH occurs, further administration of uterotonic agents as 'first-line' treatment is recommended. However, there is uncertainty about which uterotonic agent is best for the 'first-line' treatment of PPH.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the most effective uterotonic agent(s) with the least side-effects for PPH treatment, and generate a meaningful ranking among all available agents according to their relative effectiveness and side-effect profile.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 May 2020), and the reference lists of all retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing the effectiveness and safety of uterotonic agents with other uterotonic agents for the treatment of PPH were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed all trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed each trial for risk of bias. Our primary outcomes were additional blood loss of 500 mL or more after recruitment to the trial until cessation of active bleeding and the composite outcome of maternal death or severe morbidity. Secondary outcomes included blood loss-related outcomes, morbidity outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and indirect comparisons, where possible, but due to the limited number of included studies, we were unable to conduct the planned network meta-analysis. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven trials, involving 3738 women in 10 countries, were included in this review. All trials were conducted in hospital settings. Randomised women gave birth vaginally, except in one small trial, where women gave birth either vaginally or by caesarean section. Across the seven trials (14 trial arms) the following agents were used: six trial arms used oxytocin alone; four trial arms used misoprostol plus oxytocin; three trial arms used misoprostol; one trial arm used Syntometrine® (oxytocin and ergometrine fixed-dose combination) plus oxytocin infusion. Pairwise meta-analysis of two trials (1787 participants), suggests that misoprostol, as first-line treatment uterotonic agent, probably increases the risk of blood transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 2.14, moderate-certainty) compared with oxytocin. Low-certainty evidence suggests that misoprostol administration may increase the incidence of additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 2.57, 95% CI 1.00 to 6.64). The data comparing misoprostol with oxytocin is imprecise, with a wide range of treatment effects for the additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.69 to 4.02, low-certainty), maternal death or severe morbidity (RR 1.98, 95% CI 0.36 to 10.72, low-certainty, based on one study n = 809 participants, as the second study had zero events), and the use of additional uterotonics (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.94, low-certainty). The risk of side-effects may be increased with the use of misoprostol compared with oxytocin: vomiting (2 trials, 1787 participants, RR 2.47, 95% CI 1.37 to 4.47, high-certainty) and fever (2 trials, 1787 participants, RR 3.43, 95% CI 0.65 to 18.18, low-certainty). According to pairwise meta-analysis of four trials (1881 participants) generating high-certainty evidence, misoprostol plus oxytocin makes little or no difference to the use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05) and to blood transfusion (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.17) compared with oxytocin. We cannot rule out an important benefit of using the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination over oxytocin alone, for additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.06, moderate-certainty). We also cannot rule out important benefits or harms for additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.34, moderate-certainty, 3 trials, 1814 participants, one study reported zero events), and maternal mortality or severe morbidity (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.39, moderate-certainty). Misoprostol plus oxytocin increases the incidence of fever (4 trials, 1866 participants, RR 3.07, 95% CI 2.62 to 3.61, high-certainty), and vomiting (2 trials, 1482 participants, RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.95, high-certainty) compared with oxytocin alone. For all outcomes of interest, the available evidence on the misoprostol versus Syntometrine® plus oxytocin combination was of very low-certainty and these effects remain unclear. Although network meta-analysis was not performed, we were able to compare the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination with misoprostol alone through the common comparator of oxytocin. This indirect comparison suggests that the misoprostol plus oxytocin combination probably reduces the risk of blood transfusion (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.99, moderate-certainty) and may reduce the risk of additional blood loss of 1000 mL or more (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89, low-certainty) compared with misoprostol alone. The combination makes little or no difference to vomiting (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.59, high-certainty) compared with misoprostol alone. Misoprostol plus oxytocin compared to misoprostol alone are compatible with a wide range of treatment effects for additional blood loss of 500 mL or more (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.26, low-certainty), maternal mortality or severe morbidity (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.07 to 4.24, low-certainty), use of additional uterotonics (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.73, low-certainty), and fever (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.17 to 4.77, low-certainty).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that oxytocin used as first-line treatment of PPH probably is more effective than misoprostol with less side-effects. Adding misoprostol to the conventional treatment of oxytocin probably makes little or no difference to effectiveness outcomes, and is also associated with more side-effects. The evidence for most uterotonic agents used as first-line treatment of PPH is limited, with no evidence found for commonly used agents, such as injectable prostaglandins, ergometrine, and Syntometrine®.

Tranexamic acid for postpartum hemorrhage prevention in vaginal delivery: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Tranexamic acid (TA) has been demonstrated to reduce blood loss and the incidences of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) during caesarean sections. We compared the clinical efficacy of TA administration on vaginal deliveries with recently published papers.

METHODS

Electronic databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and Chinese CNKI (Chinese database) and Wanfang were searched through November 2019.The randomized controlled trials were selected between TA and control groups. The relevant studies included four trials with a total of 4579 patients.

RESULTS

Patients treated with TA had a reduction in total blood loss (P = .009), lower postoperative blood loss (P < .00001), a reduced number of PPH (P = .02). However, the occurrence of nausea or/and vomiting is higher in the TA group (the incidence of nausea or vomiting [P < .00001], nausea [P < .00001] and vomiting [P < .00001]).

CONCLUSION

TA resulted in fewer occurrence rates of PPH, and no significant increase in occurrences of dizziness or photopsia, but higher incidence of vomiting and nausea.

Comparison of the Effect of Intravenous Tranexamic Acid and Sublingual Misoprostol on Reducing Bleeding After Cesarean Section: A Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

To evaluate the effects of intravenous tranexamic acid (TA) and sublingual misoprostol on reducing bleeding after cesarean section.

Materials

One hundred and fifty-eight participants with term pregnancies scheduled for cesarean section were randomly divided into two groups. In M group, two sublingual misoprostol pills (400 mg) were administrated, immediately after the delivery. In TA group, ten minutes before skin incision, TA ampoule (1 g) was injected. In both groups, immediately after the delivery, 20 units of oxytocin in 1 L ringer lactate with speed of 1000 CC/h was injected. At the end of the operation, the amount of bleeding was measured based on the number of small and large gauzes, the blood in the suction container and the difference of patient's hemoglobin before and 24 h after surgery.

Results

Hemoglobin level reduction in the TA group was higher than the M group (- 2.45 ± 0.84 vs - 2.14 ± 1.38 g/dL) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, number of used gauze and blood suction in the TA group was significantly higher compared to sublingual misoprostol (4.67 ± 1.34 vs 3.25 ± 1.31 and 260.25 ± 79.06 vs 193.94 ± 104.79 cc, respectively) (P < 0.001). Mean blood pressure during the entire duration of surgery in the TA group decreased significantly as compared to the M group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Total bleeding was significantly lower in sublingual misoprostol as compared to the tranexamic acid group. Furthermore, in misoprostol group hemodynamic variables were stabilized greater than tranexamic acid group.

Registration Number

IRCT201708308611N6.

Antifibrinolytic drugs for treating primary postpartum haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) - heaving bleeding within the first 24 hours after giving birth - is one of the main causes of death of women after childbirth. Antifibrinolytics, primarily tranexamic acid (TXA), have been shown to reduce bleeding in surgery and safely reduces mortality in trauma patients with bleeding without increasing the risk of adverse events.An earlier Cochrane review on treatments for primary PPH covered all the various available treatments - that review has now been split by types of treatment. This new review concentrates only on the use of antifibrinolytic drugs for treating primary PPH.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of antifibrinolytic drugs for treating primary PPH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (28 May 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-randomised trials of antifibrinolytic drugs (aprotinin, TXA, epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA) and aminomethylbenzoic acid, administered by whatever route) for primary PPH in women.Participants in the trials were women after birth following a pregnancy of at least 24 weeks' gestation with a diagnosis of PPH, regardless of mode of birth (vaginal or caesarean section) or other aspects of third stage management.We have not included quasi-randomised trials, or cross-over studies. Studies reported as abstracts have not been included if there was insufficient information to allow assessment of risk of bias.In this review we only identified studies looking at TXA.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from each study using an agreed form. We entered data into Review Manager software and checked for accuracy.For key review outcomes, we rated the quality of the evidence as 'high', 'moderate', 'low' or 'very low' according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Three trials (20,412 women) met our inclusion criteria. Two trials (20,212 women) compared intravenous (IV) TXA with placebo or standard care and were conducted in acute hospital settings (labour ward, emergency department) (in high-, middle- and low-income countries).One other trial (involving 200 women) was conducted in Iran and compared IV TXA with rectal misoprostol, but did not report on any of this review's primary or GRADE outcomes. There were no trials that assessed EACA, aprotinin or aminomethylbenzoic acid.Standard care plus IV TXA for the treatment of primary PPH compared with placebo or standard care aloneTwo trials (20,212 women) assessed the effect of TXA for the treatment of primary PPH compared with placebo or standard care alone. The larger of these (The WOMAN trial) contributed over 99% of the data and was assessed as being at low risk of bias. The quality of the evidence varied for different outcomes, Overall, evidence was mainly graded as moderate to high quality.The data show that IV TXA reduces the risk of maternal death due to bleeding (risk ratio (RR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.00; two trials, 20,172 women; quality of evidence: moderate). The quality of evidence was rated as moderate due to imprecision of effect estimate. The effect was more evident in women given treatment between one and three hours after giving birth with no apparent reduction when given after three hours (< one hour = RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.16; one to three hours = RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.88; > three hours = RR 1.07, 95% 0.76 to 1.51; test for subgroup differences: Chi² = 4.90, df = 2 (P = 0.09), I² = 59.2%). There was no heterogeneity in the effect by mode of birth (test for subgroup differences: Chi² = 0.01, df = 1 (P = 0.91), I² = 0%). There were fewer deaths from all causes in women receiving TXA, although the 95% CI for the effect estimate crosses the line of no effect (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05; two trials, 20,172 women, quality of evidence: moderate). Results from one trial with 151 women suggest that blood loss of ≥ 500 mL after randomisation may be reduced (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.93; one trial, 151 women; quality of evidence: low). TXA did not reduce the risk of serious maternal morbidity (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19; one trial, 20,015 women; quality of evidence: high), hysterectomy to control bleeding (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.12; one trial, 20,017 women; quality of evidence: high) receipt of blood transfusion (any) (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.03; two trials, 20,167 women; quality of evidence: moderate) or maternal vascular occlusive events (any), although results were imprecise for this latter outcome (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.43; one trial, 20,018 women; quality of evidence: moderate). There was an increase in the use of brace sutures in the TXA group (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.01, 1.41) and a reduction in the need for laparotomy for bleeding (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49, 0.85).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

TXA when administered intravenously reduces mortality due to bleeding in women with primary PPH, irrespective of mode of birth, and without increasing the risk of thromboembolic events. Taken together with the reliable evidence of the effect of TXA in trauma patients, the evidence suggests that TXA is effective if given as early as possible.Facilities for IV administration may not be available in non-hospital settings therefore, alternative routes to IV administration need to be investigated.

Revealing pathway cross-talk related to diabetes mellitus by Monte Carlo Cross-Validation analysis

Objective

To explore potential functional biomarkers in diabetes mellitus (DM) by utilizing gene pathway cross-talk.

Methods

Firstly, potential disrupted pathways that were enriched by differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified based on biological pathways downloaded from the Ingenuity Pathways Analysis (IPA) database. In addition, we quantified the pathway crosstalk for each pair of pathways based on Discriminating Score (DS). Random forest (RF) classification was then employed to find the top 10 pairs of pathways with a high area under the curve (AUC) value between DM samples versus normal samples based on 10-fold cross-validation. Finally, a Monte Carlo Cross-Validation was applied to demonstrate the identified pairs of pathways by a mutual information analysis.

Results

A total of 247 DEGs in normal and disease samples were identified. Based on the F-test, 50 disrupted pathways were obtained with false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.01. Simultaneously, after calculating the DS, the top 10 pairs of pathways were selected based on a higher AUC value as measured by RF classification. From the Monte Carlo Cross-Validation, we considered the top 10 pairs of pathways with higher AUC values ranked for all 50 bootstraps as the most frequently detected ones.

Conclusion

The pairs of pathways identified in our study might be key regulators in DM.

Is prophylactic tranexamic acid administration effective and safe for postpartum hemorrhage prevention?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To assess the efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid (TA) in reducing blood loss and lowering transfusion needs for patients undergoing caesarean section (CS) or vaginal delivery (VD).

METHODS

An electronic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, OVID, Cochrane library, Scopus, Central, and Clinical trials.gov was performed to identify studies that evaluating the usage of TA in CS or VD. The methodological quality of included trials was assessed and data extraction was performed.

RESULTS

Finally, 25 articles with 4747 participants were included. Our findings indicated TA resulted in a reduced intra-, postoperative, and total blood loss by a mean volume of 141.25 mL (95% confidence interval [CI] -186.72 to -95.79, P < 0.00001), 36.42 mL (95% CI -46.50 to -26.34, P < 0.00001), and 154.25 mL (95% CI -182.04 to -126.47, P < 0.00001) in CS. TA administration in VD was associated with a reduced intra-, postoperative, and total blood loss by a mean volume of 22.88 mL (95% CI -50.54 to 4.77, P = 0.10), 41.24 mL (95% CI -55.50 to -26.98, P < 0.00001), and 84.79 mL (95% CI -109.93 to -59.65, P < 0.00001). In addition, TA could lower the occurrence rate of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) and severe PPH, and reduce the risk of blood transfusions. No increased risk of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) after CS or VD was associated with TA usage, while the minor side effects were more common.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicated that intravenous TA for patients undergoing CS was effective and safe. Although prophylactic TA administration is associated with reduced PPH, current existing data are insufficient to draw definitive recommendations about its clinical significance due to the poor to moderate quality of the included literatures. Thus, high-quality randomized controlled trials with larger samples are needed to validate our findings.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Gestational Diabetes in Iran: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Gestational Diabetes (GD) is one of the major public health issues. The purpose of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the risk factors and prevalence rate of this disorder in Iran.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta- analysis article was prepared using the databases of Science Direct, Pub-Med, Scopus, Magiran, Iranmedex and SID, Google search engine, Gray Literature, reference lists check and hand searching using keywords such as "prevalence", "gestational diabetes mellitus", "GDM", "risk factor*", "Iran" and "Postpartum Diabetes". The selected papers were fully reviewed and the required information for the systematic review was extracted and summarized using extraction table in Microsoft Office Excel software.

RESULTS

Twenty-four of 1011 papers were quite relevant to the objectives of the review so they were included. The mean age of the participants was 29.43±4.97 yr and the prevalence of GDM was 3.41% (the highest and the lowest prevalence rates were 18.6% and 1.3% respectively). Among the influential factors mentioned in the literature, potential causes of GDM are gestational age, history of gestational diabetes, family history of diabetes, body mass index, abortions and parity, and history of macrosomia.

CONCLUSION

Considering the high prevalence of postpartum diabetes and its related factors in Iran, strategic planning for disease prevention and reduction is inevitable.