-
Anaesthesiology Intensive Therapy 2015Blood loss and subsequent transfusions are associated with major morbidity and mortality. The use of antifibrinolytics can reduce blood loss in cardiac surgery, trauma,... (Review)
Review
Blood loss and subsequent transfusions are associated with major morbidity and mortality. The use of antifibrinolytics can reduce blood loss in cardiac surgery, trauma, orthopedic surgery, liver surgery and solid organ transplantation, obstetrics and gynecology, neurosurgery and non-surgical diseases. The evidence of their efficacy has been mounting for years. Tranexamic acid (TXA), a synthetic lysine-analogue antifibrinolytic, was first patented in 1957 and its use has been increasing in contrast to aprotinin, a serine protease inhibitor antifibrinolytic. This review aims to help acute care physicians navigate through the clinical evidence available for TXA therapy, develop appropriate dose regimens whilst minimizing harm, as well as understand its broadening scope of applications. Many questions remain unanswered regarding other clinical effects of TXA such as anti-inflammatory response to cardiopulmonary bypass, the risk of thromboembolic events, adverse neurological effects such as seizures, and its morbidity and mortality, all of which necessitate further clinical trials on its usage and safety in various clinical settings.
Topics: Antifibrinolytic Agents; Blood Loss, Surgical; General Surgery; Humans; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 25797505
DOI: 10.5603/AIT.a2015.0011 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2017In people with acute pancreatitis, it is unclear what the role should be for medical treatment as an addition to supportive care such as fluid and electrolyte balance... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In people with acute pancreatitis, it is unclear what the role should be for medical treatment as an addition to supportive care such as fluid and electrolyte balance and organ support in people with organ failure.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of different pharmacological interventions in people with acute pancreatitis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2016, Issue 9), MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and trial registers to October 2016 to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We also searched the references of included trials to identify further trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered only RCTs performed in people with acute pancreatitis, irrespective of aetiology, severity, presence of infection, language, blinding, or publication status for inclusion in the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently identified trials and extracted data. We did not perform a network meta-analysis as planned because of the lack of information on potential effect modifiers and differences of type of participants included in the different comparisons, when information was available. We calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the binary outcomes and rate ratios with 95% CIs for count outcomes using a fixed-effect model and random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 84 RCTs with 8234 participants in this review. Six trials (N = 658) did not report any of the outcomes of interest for this review. The remaining 78 trials excluded 210 participants after randomisation. Thus, a total of 7366 participants in 78 trials contributed to one or more outcomes for this review. The treatments assessed in these 78 trials included antibiotics, antioxidants, aprotinin, atropine, calcitonin, cimetidine, EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid), gabexate, glucagon, iniprol, lexipafant, NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs), octreotide, oxyphenonium, probiotics, activated protein C, somatostatin, somatostatin plus omeprazole, somatostatin plus ulinastatin, thymosin, ulinastatin, and inactive control. Apart from the comparison of antibiotics versus control, which included a large proportion of participants with necrotising pancreatitis, the remaining comparisons had only a small proportion of patients with this condition. Most trials included either only participants with severe acute pancreatitis or included a mixture of participants with mild acute pancreatitis and severe acute pancreatitis (75 trials). Overall, the risk of bias in trials was unclear or high for all but one of the trials.
SOURCE OF FUNDING
seven trials were not funded or funded by agencies without vested interest in results. Pharmaceutical companies partially or fully funded 21 trials. The source of funding was not available from the remaining trials.Since we considered short-term mortality as the most important outcome, we presented only these results in detail in the abstract. Sixty-seven studies including 6638 participants reported short-term mortality. There was no evidence of any differences in short-term mortality in any of the comparisons (very low-quality evidence). With regards to other primary outcomes, serious adverse events (number) were lower than control in participants taking lexipafant (rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.96; N = 290; 1 study; very low-quality evidence), octreotide (rate ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.89; N = 770; 5 studies; very low-quality evidence), somatostatin plus omeprazole (rate ratio 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.70; N = 140; 1 study; low-quality evidence), and somatostatin plus ulinastatin (rate ratio 0.30, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.60; N = 122; 1 study; low-quality evidence). The proportion of people with organ failure was lower in octreotide than control (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.97; N = 430; 3 studies; very low-quality evidence). The proportion of people with sepsis was lower in lexipafant than control (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.83; N = 290; 1 study; very low-quality evidence). There was no evidence of differences in any of the remaining comparisons in these outcomes or for any of the remaining primary outcomes (the proportion of participants experiencing at least one serious adverse event and the occurrence of infected pancreatic necrosis). None of the trials reported heath-related quality of life.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Very low-quality evidence suggests that none of the pharmacological treatments studied decrease short-term mortality in people with acute pancreatitis. However, the confidence intervals were wide and consistent with an increase or decrease in short-term mortality due to the interventions. We did not find consistent clinical benefits with any intervention. Because of the limitations in the prognostic scoring systems and because damage to organs may occur in acute pancreatitis before they are clinically manifest, future trials should consider including pancreatitis of all severity but power the study to measure the differences in the subgroup of people with severe acute pancreatitis. It may be difficult to power the studies based on mortality. Future trials in participants with acute pancreatitis should consider other outcomes such as complications or health-related quality of life as primary outcomes. Such trials should include health-related quality of life, costs, and return to work as outcomes and should follow patients for at least three months (preferably for at least one year).
Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antioxidants; Confidence Intervals; Gastrointestinal Agents; Humans; Pancreatitis; Pancreatitis, Acute Necrotizing; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 28431202
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011384.pub2 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Jun 2022The concept of patient blood management (PBM) was introduced by the World Health Organization in 2011 and is defined as a "patient-focused, evidence-based and systematic... (Review)
Review
The concept of patient blood management (PBM) was introduced by the World Health Organization in 2011 and is defined as a "patient-focused, evidence-based and systematic approach for optimizing the management of patients and transfusion of blood products to ensure high quality and effective patient care". Patient blood management is a multimodal approach based on three pillars: optimization of blood mass, minimization of blood loss and optimization of patient tolerance to anaemia. Antifibrinolytics play a major role in cardiac surgery, where the risk of perioperative bleeding is high and affects a majority of patients, by effectively reducing bleeding, transfusions, re-operations, as well as their associated morbidity and mortality. They represent an essential part of the pharmacological arsenal of patient blood management. However, despite the trend towards high-level PBM practices, currently very few European countries have national PBM guidelines and these guidelines, taken as a whole, are heterogeneous in form and content. In particular, the use of antifibrinolytics in cardiac surgery is often not discussed in detail beyond general prophylactic use and any recommendations lack detail including choice of drug, dosing, and mode of administration. Thus, the implementation of PBM programs in Europe is still challenging. In 2021, the WHO published a new document highlighting the urgent need to close the gap in PBM awareness and implementation and announced their upcoming initiative to develop specific PBM implementation guidelines. This review aims first, to summarize the role played by fibrinolysis in haemostatic disorders; second, to give an overview of the current available guidelines in Europe detailing PBM implementation in cardiac surgery; and third, to analyse the place and use of antifibrinolytics in these guidelines.
Topics: Anemia; Antifibrinolytic Agents; Blood Loss, Surgical; Blood Transfusion; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Hemorrhage; Humans
PubMed: 35065393
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2022.110654 -
International Journal of Molecular... Jul 2023Aprotinin (APR) was discovered in 1930. APR is an effective pan-protease inhibitor, a typical "magic shotgun". Until 2007, APR was widely used as an antithrombotic and... (Review)
Review
Aprotinin (APR) was discovered in 1930. APR is an effective pan-protease inhibitor, a typical "magic shotgun". Until 2007, APR was widely used as an antithrombotic and anti-inflammatory drug in cardiac and noncardiac surgeries for reduction of bleeding and thus limiting the need for blood transfusion. The ability of APR to inhibit proteolytic activation of some viruses leads to its use as an antiviral drug for the prevention and treatment of acute respiratory virus infections. However, due to incompetent interpretation of several clinical trials followed by incredible controversy in the literature, the usage of APR was nearly stopped for a decade worldwide. In 2015-2020, after re-analysis of these clinical trials' data the restrictions in APR usage were lifted worldwide. This review discusses antiviral mechanisms of APR action and summarizes current knowledge and prospective regarding the use of APR treatment for diseases caused by RNA-containing viruses, including influenza and SARS-CoV-2 viruses, or as a part of combination antiviral treatment.
Topics: Humans; Aprotinin; SARS-CoV-2; Prospective Studies; COVID-19; Antiviral Agents; Respiration Disorders
PubMed: 37446350
DOI: 10.3390/ijms241311173 -
Anaesthesia Jan 2015There is a considerable difference between the mechanism of action of the lysine analogues, tranexamic acid and epsilon-aminocaproic acid, and the serine protease... (Review)
Review
There is a considerable difference between the mechanism of action of the lysine analogues, tranexamic acid and epsilon-aminocaproic acid, and the serine protease inhibitor aprotinin. Aprotinin acts to inactivate free plasmin, but with little effect on bound plasmin, whereas the lysine analogues are designed to prevent excessive plasmin formation by fitting into plasminogen's lysine-binding site to prevent the binding of plasminogen to fibrin. Aprotinin is associated with a reduction in bleeding and transfusion requirements following major surgery, and has a dose-response profile, compared with no dose-response effect in the one study investigating tranexamic acid in cardiac surgical patients. Following its withdrawal in 2007, which is explained in detail in this review, the regulators have now licensed aprotinin for myocardial revascularisation only, which is relatively low-risk for bleeding.
Topics: Animals; Aprotinin; Hemorrhage; Hemostatics; Humans; Tranexamic Acid
PubMed: 25440394
DOI: 10.1111/anae.12907 -
Polish Journal of Radiology 2014Summary Amyloidosis is a clinical condition caused by deposition of various protein fibrills in extracellular space. The presented symptoms depend on the type of... (Review)
Review
Summary Amyloidosis is a clinical condition caused by deposition of various protein fibrills in extracellular space. The presented symptoms depend on the type of deposits and the organ or organs involved. The correct diagnosis is often difficult, due to lack of nonivasive imaging techniques and insufficiency of morphological imaging procedures delievered by radiology. We presented a list of potential radiopharmaceuticals that can be used in detecting various types of amyloidoses. (123)I-SAP proved to have high sensitivity in imaging of AA and AL amyloidosis in visceral organs. (99m)Tc-Aprotinin was found to be useful in detecting cardiac amyloidosis. A couple of classical radiotracers, such as (201)Tl, (123)I-mIBG, together with (111)In-antimyosin were also tested for accuracy in cardiac imaging, however the main problem was low specificity. Potential applicability was also found in case of some bone-seeking agents and other radiotracers, e.g. (67)Ga-citrate and (99m)Tc-penta-DMSA. High sensitivity and specificity was achieved with β2-microglobulin labeled with (131)I or (111)In. Among PET tracers, (11)C-PIB deserves more attention, because it may have an important role in diagnosing of AD in the near future. Further clinical studies are expected to take place, because noninvasive diagnosing and monitoring of amyloidosis is still a challenge.
PubMed: 25071873
DOI: 10.12659/PJR.890147 -
Cells Oct 2020Severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the current coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Protease inhibitors are under...
Severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the cause of the current coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. Protease inhibitors are under consideration as virus entry inhibitors that prevent the cleavage of the coronavirus spike (S) protein by cellular proteases. Herein, we showed that the protease inhibitor aprotinin (but not the protease inhibitor SERPINA1/alpha-1 antitrypsin) inhibited SARS-CoV-2 replication in therapeutically achievable concentrations. An analysis of proteomics and translatome data indicated that SARS-CoV-2 replication is associated with a downregulation of host cell protease inhibitors. Hence, aprotinin may compensate for downregulated host cell proteases during later virus replication cycles. Aprotinin displayed anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity in different cell types (Caco2, Calu-3, and primary bronchial epithelial cell air-liquid interface cultures) and against four virus isolates. In conclusion, therapeutic aprotinin concentrations exert anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity. An approved aprotinin aerosol may have potential for the early local control of SARS-CoV-2 replication and the prevention of COVID-19 progression to a severe, systemic disease.
Topics: Animals; Antiviral Agents; Aprotinin; COVID-19; Caco-2 Cells; Chlorocebus aethiops; Epithelial Cells; Humans; Pandemics; SARS-CoV-2; Serine Proteinase Inhibitors; Vero Cells; Virus Replication; COVID-19 Drug Treatment
PubMed: 33143316
DOI: 10.3390/cells9112377 -
Patient Preference and Adherence 2016Weight-based dosing strategy is still challenging due to poor awareness and adherence. It is necessary to let clinicians know of the latest developments in this respect... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Weight-based dosing strategy is still challenging due to poor awareness and adherence. It is necessary to let clinicians know of the latest developments in this respect and the correct circumstances in which weight-based dosing is of clinical relevance.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed.
RESULTS
Clinical indications, physiological factors, and types of medication may determine the applicability of weight-based dosing. In some cases, the weight effect may be minimal or the proper dosage can only be determined when weight is combined with other factors. Medications within similar therapeutic or structural class (eg, anticoagulants, antitumor necrosis factor medications, P2Y12-receptor antagonists, and anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibodies) may exhibit differences in requirements on weight-based dosing. In some cases, weight-based dosing is superior to currently recommended fixed-dose regimen in adult patients (eg, hydrocortisone, vancomycin, linezolid, and aprotinin). On the contrary, fixed dosing is noninferior to or even better than currently recommended weight-based regimen in adult patients in some cases (eg, cyclosporine microemulsion, recombinant activated Factor VII, and epoetin α). Ideal body-weight-based dosing may be superior to the currently recommended total body-weight-based regimen (eg, atracurium and rocuronium). For dosing in pediatrics, whether weight-based dosing is better than body surface-area-based dosing is dependent on the particular medication (eg, methotrexate, prednisone, prednisolone, zidovudine, didanosine, growth hormone, and 13-cis-retinoic acid). Age-based dosing strategy is better than weight-based dosing in some cases (eg, intravenous busulfan and dalteparin). Dosing guided by pharmacogenetic testing did not show pharmacoeconomic advantage over weight-adjusted dosing of 6-mercaptopurine. The common viewpoint (ie, pediatric patients should be dosed on the basis of body weight) is not always correct. Effective weight-based dosing interventions include standardization of weight estimation, documentation and dosing determination, dosing chart, dosing protocol, order set, pharmacist participation, technological information, and educational measures.
CONCLUSION
Although dosing methods are specified in prescribing information for each drug and there are no principal pros and cons to be elaborated, this review of weight-based dosing strategy will enrich the knowledge of medication administration from the perspectives of safety, efficacy, and pharmacoeconomics, and will also provide research opportunities in clinical practice. Clinicians should be familiar with dosage and administration of the medication to be prescribed as well as the latest developments.
PubMed: 27110105
DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S103156 -
Acta Cirurgica Brasileira 2016Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) procedures are thought to activate systemic inflammatory reaction syndrome (SIRS). Strategies to curb systemic inflammation have been... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) procedures are thought to activate systemic inflammatory reaction syndrome (SIRS). Strategies to curb systemic inflammation have been previously described. However, none of them is adequate, since "curbing" the extent of the inflammatory response requires a multimodal approach. The aim of the present mini-review is to discuss the main key points about the main principles in cardiopulmonary bypass curbing inflammation.
METHODS
No systematic literature search (MEDLINE) and extracted data from the accumulated experience of the authors. The preconceived idea of an association between severe inflammation and coagulation disorders is reviewed. Also, some fundamental concepts, CPB inflammatory biomarkers, the vasoplegic syndrome and the need forindividual CPB protocols for children, diabetes and old patients, are discussed.
CONCLUSION
The ways in which surgical technique (atraumatic vein harvest, biocompatibility and shear resistance of the circuit, monitoring, minimizing organ ischemia, minimal cross-clamping trauma, and blood management) are thought to curb SIRS induced by CPB and affect positively the patient outcome.Improved patient outcomes are strongly associated with these modalities of care, more than single or combinatorial drug strategies (aprotinin, tranexamic acid, pentoxifylline) or CPB modalities (minicircuits, heparin-coated circuits, retrograde autologous prime).
Topics: Biomarkers; Cardiopulmonary Bypass; Cytokines; Diabetes Complications; Humans; Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome; Vasoplegia
PubMed: 27142905
DOI: 10.1590/S0102-86502016001300010 -
Medicine in Drug Discovery Sep 2020Since its first appearance in December 2019 in the Chinese province of Wuhan, COVID-19 has spread rapidly throughout the world and poses a serious threat to public... (Review)
Review
Since its first appearance in December 2019 in the Chinese province of Wuhan, COVID-19 has spread rapidly throughout the world and poses a serious threat to public health. Acute respiratory failure due to widespread lung inflammation progress to acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) with an altered pulmonary and alveolar function that can lead to disability, prolong hospitalizations, and adverse outcomes. While there is no specific treatment for severe acute lung injury (ALI) and ARDS due to the COVID-19 and the management is mostly supportive, it is very important to better understand the pathophysiological processes activated by the inflammatory mediators such as cytokines and metalloproteinases with the aim of their subsequent inhibition in the course of the complex treatment. Herein, we will discuss the pathophysiological mechanisms of ALI/ARDS, with a focus on the pivotal role played by matrix metalloproteinases (MMP) and the kinin-kallikrein system (KKS), and the effects of the possible pharmacological interventions. Aprotinin is a nonspecific protease inhibitor especially of trypsin, chymotrypsin, plasmin, and kallikrein, and it is many years in clinical use. Aprotinin inhibits the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines and involved in the process of glycoprotein homeostasis. Experimental data support that the use of aprotinin to inhibit MMPs and KKS may be a new potential approach to the treatment of ALI / ARDS.
PubMed: 32537610
DOI: 10.1016/j.medidd.2020.100052