Ultra-Early and Short-Term Tranexamic Acid Treatment in Patients With Good- and Poor-Grade Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage

The results of the ULTRA trial showed that ultra-early and short-term treatment with tranexamic acid (TXA) does not improve clinical outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Possibly, the lack of a beneficial effect in all patients with aSAH is masked by antagonistic effects of TXA in certain subgroups. In this post hoc subgroup analysis, we investigated the effect of TXA on clinical outcome in patients with good-grade and poor-grade aSAH

Ultra-Early and Short-Term Tranexamic Acid Treatment in Patients With Good- and Poor-Grade Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The results of the ULTRA trial showed that ultra-early and short-term treatment with tranexamic acid (TXA) does not improve clinical outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Possibly, the lack of a beneficial effect in all patients with aSAH is masked by antagonistic effects of TXA in certain subgroups. In this post hoc subgroup analysis, we investigated the effect of TXA on clinical outcome in patients with good-grade and poor-grade aSAH. METHODS: The ULTRA trial was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label trial with blinded outcome assessment. Participants received ultra-early and short-term TXA in addition to usual care or usual care only. This post hoc subgroup analysis included only ULTRA participants with confirmed aSAH and available World Federation of Neurosurgical Societies (WFNS) grade on admission. Patients were categorized into those with good-grade (WFNS 1-3) and poor-grade (WFNS 4-5) aSAH. The primary outcome was clinical outcome assessed by the modified Rankin scale (mRS). Odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs (aORs) with 95% CIs were calculated using ordinal regression analyses. Analyses were performed using the as-treated principle. In all patients with aSAH, no significant effect modification of TXA on clinical outcome was observed for admission WFNS grade (p = 0.10). RESULTS: Of the 812 ULTRA participants, 473 patients had (58%; N = 232 TXA, N = 241 usual care) good-grade and 339 (42%; N = 162 TXA, N = 176 usual care) patients had poor-grade aSAH. In patients with good-grade aSAH, the TXA group had worse clinical outcomes (OR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.94, aOR 0.68, 95% CI 0.48-0.94) compared with the usual care group. In patients with poor-grade aSAH, clinical outcomes were comparable between treatment groups (OR: 1.04, 95% CI 0.70-1.55, aOR 1.05, 95% CI 0.70-1.56). DISCUSSION: This post hoc subgroup analysis provides another important argument against the use of TXA treatment in patients with aSAH, by showing worse clinical outcomes in patients with good-grade aSAH treated with TXA and no clinical benefit of TXA in patients with poor-grade aSAH, compared with patients treated with usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02684812; submission date February 18, 2016, first patient enrollment on July 24, 2013). CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that tranexamic acid, given for <24 hours within the first 24 hours, does not improve the 6-month outcome in good-grade or poor initial-grade aneurysmal SAH

Effectiveness of an annular closure device to prevent recurrent lumbar disc herniation a secondary analysis with 5 years of follow-up

IMPORTANCE: Patients with large annular defects following lumbar microdiscectomy for disc herniation are at increased risk for symptomatic recurrence and reoperation. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a bone-anchored annular closure device in addition to lumbar microdiscectomy resulted in lower reherniation and reoperation rates vs lumbar microdiscectomy alone. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial reports 5-year follow-up for enrolled patients between December 2010 and October 2014 at 21 clinical sites. Patients in this study had a large annular defect (6-10 mm width) following lumbar microdiscectomy for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Statistical analysis was performed from November to December 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Lumbar microdiscectomy with additional bone-anchored annular closure device (device group) or lumbar microdiscectomy only (control group). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The incidence of symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and adverse events as well as changes in leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life when comparing the device and control groups over 5 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Among 554 randomized participants (mean [SD] age: 43 [11] years; 327 [59%] were men), 550 were included in the modified intent-to-treat efficacy population (device group: n = 272; 270 [99%] were White); control group: n = 278; 273 [98%] were White) and 550 were included in the as-treated safety population (device group: n = 267; control group: n = 283). The risk of symptomatic reherniation (18.8% [SE, 2.5%] vs 31.6% [SE, 2.9%]; P < .001) and reoperation (16.0% [SE, 2.3%] vs 22.6% [SE, 2.6%]; P = .03) was lower in the device group. There were 53 reoperations in 40 patients in the device group and 82 reoperations in 58 patients in the control group. Scores for leg pain severity, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life significantly improved over 5 years of follow-up with no clinically relevant differences between groups. The frequency of serious adverse events was comparable between the treatment groups. Serious adverse events associated with the device or procedure were less frequent in the device group (12.0% vs 20.5%; difference, −8.5%; 95% CI, −14.6% to −2.3%; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In patients who are at high risk of recurrent herniation following lumbar microdiscectomy owing to a large defect in the annulus fibrosus, this study’s findings suggest that annular closure with a bone-anchored implant lowers the risk of symptomatic recurrence and reoperation over 5 years of follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0128343

Effectiveness of an Annular Closure Device to Prevent Recurrent Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Secondary Analysis with 5 Years of Follow-up

Importance: Patients with large annular defects following lumbar microdiscectomy for disc herniation are at increased risk for symptomatic recurrence and reoperation. Objective: To determine whether a bone-anchored annular closure device in addition to lumbar microdiscectomy resulted in lower reherniation and reoperation rates vs lumbar microdiscectomy alone. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial reports 5-year follow-up for enrolled patients between December 2010 and October 2014 at 21 clinical sites. Patients in this study had a large annular defect (6-10 mm width) following lumbar microdiscectomy for treatment of lumbar disc herniation. Statistical analysis was performed from November to December 2020. Interventions: Lumbar microdiscectomy with additional bone-anchored annular closure device (device group) or lumbar microdiscectomy only (control group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence of symptomatic reherniation, reoperation, and adverse events as well as changes in leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life when comparing the device and control groups over 5 years of follow-up. Results: Among 554 randomized participants (mean [SD] age: 43 [11] years; 327 [59%] were men), 550 were included in the modified intent-to-treat efficacy population (device group: n = 272; 270 [99%] were White); control group: n = 278; 273 [98%] were White) and 550 were included in the as-treated safety population (device group: n = 267; control group: n = 283). The risk of symptomatic reherniation (18.8% [SE, 2.5%] vs 31.6% [SE, 2.9%]; P <.001) and reoperation (16.0% [SE, 2.3%] vs 22.6% [SE, 2.6%]; P =.03) was lower in the device group. There were 53 reoperations in 40 patients in the device group and 82 reoperations in 58 patients in the control group. Scores for leg pain severity, Oswestry Disability Index, and health-related quality of life significantly improved over 5 years of follow-up with no clinically relevant differences between groups. The frequency of serious adverse events was comparable between the treatment groups. Serious adverse events associated with the device or procedure were less frequent in the device group (12.0% vs 20.5%; difference, -8.5%; 95% CI, -14.6% to -2.3%; P =.008). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients who are at high risk of recurrent herniation following lumbar microdiscectomy owing to a large defect in the annulus fibrosus, this study's findings suggest that annular closure with a bone-anchored implant lowers the risk of symptomatic recurrence and reoperation over 5 years of follow-up. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01283438

Tranexamic Acid After Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: Post-Hoc Analysis of the ULTRA Trial

Background and ObjectivesThe ULTRA trial showed that ultra-early and short-term tranexamic acid treatment after subarachnoid hemorrhage did not improve clinical outcome at 6 months. An expected proportion of the included patients experienced nonaneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. In this post hoc study, we will investigate whether ultra-early and short-term tranexamic acid treatment in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage improves clinical outcome at 6 months.MethodsThe ULTRA trial is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled, open-label trial with blinded outcome assessment, conducted between July 24, 2013, and January 20, 2020. After confirmation of subarachnoid hemorrhage on noncontrast CT, patients were allocated to either ultra-early and short-term tranexamic acid treatment with usual care or usual care only. In this post hoc analysis, we included all ULTRA participants with a confirmed aneurysm on CT angiography and/or digital subtraction angiography. The primary endpoint was clinical outcome at 6 months, assessed by the modified Rankin scale (mRS), dichotomized into good (0-3) and poor (4-6) outcomes.ResultsOf the 813 ULTRA trial patients who experienced an aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, 409 (50%) were assigned to the tranexamic acid group and 404 (50%) to the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 233 of 405 (58%) patients in the tranexamic acid group and 238 of 399 (60%) patients in the control group had a good clinical outcome (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.92; 95% CI 0.69-1.24). None of the secondary outcomes showed significant differences between the treatment groups: excellent clinical outcome (mRS 0-2) (aOR 0.76; 95% CI 0.57-1.03), all-cause mortality at 30 days (aOR 0.91; 95% CI 0.65-1.28), and all-cause mortality at 6 months (aOR 1.10; 95% CI 0.80-1.52).DiscussionUltra-early and short-term tranexamic acid treatment did not improve clinical outcomes at 6 months in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and therefore cannot be recommended.Trial Registration InformationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02684812; submission date February 18, 2016, first patient enrollment on July 24, 2013).Classification of EvidenceThis study provides Class II evidence that tranexamic acid does not improve outcomes in patients presenting with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

Ultra-early tranexamic acid after subarachnoid haemorrhage (ULTRA): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: In patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage, short-term antifibrinolytic therapy with tranexamic acid has been shown to reduce the risk of rebleeding. However, whether this treatment improves clinical outcome is unclear. We investigated whether ultra-early, short-term treatment with tranexamic acid improves clinical outcome at 6 months. METHODS: In this multicentre prospective, randomised, controlled, open-label trial with masked outcome assessment, adult patients with spontaneous CT-proven subarachnoid haemorrhage in eight treatment centres and 16 referring hospitals in the Netherlands were randomly assigned to treatment with tranexamic acid in addition to care as usual (tranexamic acid group) or care as usual only (control group). Tranexamic acid was started immediately after diagnosis in the presenting hospital (1 g bolus, followed by continuous infusion of 1 g every 8 h, terminated immediately before aneurysm treatment, or 24 h after start of the medication, whichever came first). The primary endpoint was clinical outcome at 6 months, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale, dichotomised into a good (0-3) or poor (4-6) clinical outcome. Both primary and safety analyses were according to intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02684812. FINDINGS: Between July 24, 2013, and July 29, 2019, we enrolled 955 patients; 480 patients were randomly assigned to tranexamic acid and 475 patients to the control group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, good clinical outcome was observed in 287 (60%) of 475 patients in the tranexamic acid group, and 300 (64%) of 470 patients in the control group (treatment centre adjusted odds ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·66-1·12). Rebleeding after randomisation and before aneurysm treatment occurred in 49 (10%) patients in the tranexamic acid and in 66 (14%) patients in the control group (odds ratio 0·71, 95% CI 0·48-1·04). Other serious adverse events were comparable between groups. INTERPRETATION: In patients with CT-proven subarachnoid haemorrhage, presumably caused by a ruptured aneurysm, ultra-early, short-term tranexamic acid treatment did not improve clinical outcome at 6 months, as measured by the modified Rankin Scale. FUNDING: Fonds NutsOhra