Aims

Antifibrinolytic agents, including tranexamic acid (TXA) and epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA), have been shown to be safe and effective for decreasing perioperative blood loss and transfusion following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA). However, there are few prospective studies that directly compare these agents. The purpose of this study was to compare the benefits of intraoperative intravenous TXA with EACA.

We investigated the effect of a fibrinolytic inhibitor, tranexamic acid, on blood loss and blood transfusion in knee arthroplasty by a randomised, double-blind study of 86 patients. A dose of 10 mg/kg body-weight of either tranexamic acid or placebo was given intravenously shortly before the release of the tourniquet, and repeated three hours later. The mean total blood loss was 730 ± 280 ml in the tranexamic acid group as against 1410 ± 480 ml in the placebo group (p < 0.001).

Both the number of patients receiving blood transfusion and the number of blood units transfused were reduced to one-third in the treated group, and mean postoperative Hb concentrations were significantly higher after prophylaxis. The number of thromboembolic complications was the same in both groups. Tranexamic acid should be given prophylactically in order to be effective.

Aims. Recent improvements in surgical technique and perioperative blood management after total joint replacement (TJR) have decreased rates of transfusion. However, as many surgeons transition to outpatient TJR, obtaining routine postoperative blood tests becomes more challenging. Therefore, we sought to determine if a preoperative outpatient assessment tool that stratifies patients based on numerous medical comorbidities could predict who required postoperative haemoglobin (Hb) measurement. Methods. We performed a prospective study of consecutive unilateral primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) and total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed at a single institution. Prospectively collected data included preoperative and postoperative Hb levels, need for blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and Outpatient Arthroplasty Risk Assessment (OARA) score. Results. A total of 504 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age at time of arthroplasty was 65.3 years (SD 10.2). Of the patients, 216 (42.9%) were THAs and 288 (57.1%) were TKAs. Six patients required a blood transfusion postoperatively (1.19%). Transfusion after surgery was associated with lower postoperative day 1 Hb (median of 8.5 (interquartile range (IQR) 7.9 to 8.6) vs 11.3 (IQR 10.4 to 12.2); p < 0.001), longer length of stay (1 day (IQR 1 to 1) vs 2 days (IQR 2 to 3); p < 0.001), higher OARA score (median of 60.0 (IQR 40 to 75) vs 5.0 (IQR 0-35); p = 0.001), and total hip arthroplasty (p < 0.001). All patients who received a transfusion had an OARA score > 34; however, this did not reach statistical significance as a screening threshold. Conclusion. Risk of blood transfusion after primary TJR was uncommon in our series, with an incidence of 1.19%. Transfusion was associated with OARA scores > 60. The OARA score, not American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, reliably identified patients at risk for postoperative blood transfusion. Selective Hb monitoring may result in substantial cost savings in the era of cost containment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):65–70

In our department we use an enhanced recovery protocol for joint replacement of the lower limb. This incorporates the use of intravenous tranexamic acid (IVTA; 15 mg/kg) at the induction of anaesthesia. Recently there was a national shortage of IVTA for 18 weeks; during this period all patients received an oral preparation of tranexamic acid (OTA; 25 mg/kg). This retrospective study compares the safety (surgical and medical complications) and efficacy (reduction of transfusion requirements) of OTA and IVTA. During the study period a total of 2698 patients received IVTA and 302 received OTA. After adjusting for a range of patient and surgical factors, the odds ratio (OR) of receiving a blood transfusion was significantly higher with IVTA than with OTA (OR 0.48 (95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.89), p = 0.019), whereas the safety profile was similar, based on length of stay, rate of readmission, return to theatre, deep infection, stroke, gastrointestinal bleeding, myocardial infarction, pneumonia, deep-vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. The financial benefit of OTA is £2.04 for a 70 kg patient; this is amplified when the cost saving associated with significantly fewer blood transfusions is considered.

Although the number of patients in the study is modest, this work supports the use of OTA, and we recommend that a randomised trial be undertaken to compare the different methods of administering tranexamic acid.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1556–61.

We hypothesised there was no clinical value in using an autologous blood transfusion (ABT) drain in either primary total hip (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) in terms of limiting allogeneic blood transfusions when a modern restrictive blood management regime was followed. A total of 575 patients (65.2% men), with a mean age of 68.9 years (36 to 94) were randomised in this three-arm study to no drainage (group A), or to wound drainage with an ABT drain for either six hours (group B) or 24 hours (group C). The primary outcome was the number of patients receiving allogeneic blood transfusion. Secondary outcomes were post-operative haemoglobin (Hb) levels, length of hospital stay and adverse events.

This study identified only 41 transfused patients, with no significant difference in distribution between the three groups (p = 0.857). The mean pre-operative haemoglobin (Hb) value in the transfused group was 12.8 g/dL (9.8 to 15.5) versus 14.3 g/dL (10.6 to 18.0) in the non-transfused group (p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval: 1.08 to 1.86). Post-operatively, the median of re-transfused shed blood in patients with a THR was 280 mL (Interquartile range (IQR) 150 to 400) and in TKR patients 500 mL (IQR 350 to 650) (p <  0.001). ABT drains had no effect on the proportion of transfused patients in primary THR and TKR. The secondary outcomes were also comparable between groups.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:765–71.

This prospective randomised clinical trial evaluated the effect of alternatives for allogeneic blood transfusions after total hip replacement and total knee replacement in patients with pre-operative haemoglobin levels between 10.0 g/dl and 13.0 g/dl. A total of 100 patients were randomly allocated to the Eprex (pre-operative injections of epoetin) or Bellovac groups (post-operative retransfusion of shed blood). Allogeneic blood transfusions were administered according to hospital policy.

In the Eprex group, 4% of the patients (two patients) received at least one allogeneic blood transfusion. In the Bellovac group, where a mean 216 ml (0 to 700) shed blood was retransfused, 28% (14 patients) required the allogeneic transfusion (p = 0.002). When comparing Eprex with Bellovac in total hip replacement, the percentages were 7% (two of 30 patients) and 30% (nine of 30 patients) (p = 0.047) respectively, whereas in total knee replacement, the percentages were 0% (0 of 20 patients) and 25% (five of 20 patients) respectively (p = 0.042).

Pre-operative epoetin injections are more effective but more costly in reducing the need for allogeneic blood transfusions in mildly anaemic patients than post-operative retransfusion of autologous blood.

Primary arthroplasty may be denied to very elderly patients based upon the perceived outcome and risks associated with surgery. This prospective study compared the outcome, complications, and mortality of total hip (TKR) and total knee replacement (TKR) in a prospectively selected group of patients aged ≥ 80 years with that of a control group aged between 65 and 74 years. There were 171 and 495 THRs and 185 and 492 TKRs performed in the older and control groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the mean improvement of Oxford hip and knee scores between the groups at 12 months (0.98, (95% confidence interval (CI) −0.66 to 2.95), p = 0.34 and 1.15 (95% CI −0.65 to 2.94), p = 0.16, respectively). The control group had a significantly (p = 0.02 and p = 0.04, respectively) greater improvement in the physical well being component of their SF-12 score, but the older group was more satisfied with their THR (p = 0.047). The older group had a longer hospital stay for both THR (5.9 versus 9.0 days, p < 0.0001) and TKR (6.2 versus 8.3 days, p < 0.0001). The rates of post-operative complications and mortality were increased in the older group.

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative efficacy of regional and general anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement. A comprehensive search for relevant studies was performed in PubMed (1966 to April 2008), EMBASE (1969 to April 2008) and the Cochrane Library. Only randomised studies comparing regional and general anaesthesia for total hip or knee replacement were included.

We identified 21 independent, randomised clinical trials. A random-effects model was used to calculate all effect sizes. Pooled results from these trials showed that regional anaesthesia reduces the operating time (odds ratio (OR) −0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.33 to −0.05), the need for transfusion (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.94) and the incidence of thromboembolic disease (deep-vein thrombosis OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.84; pulmonary embolism OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.80).

Regional anaesthesia therefore seems to improve the outcome of patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement.