METHODS: The systematic review and meta-analysis covered the period from 1989 to 2023. Multiple databases, including Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences (WoS), MagIran, Scientific Information Database (SID), and Google Scholar, were searched using validated keywords with MeSH and Emtree. The I2 index was used to check for heterogeneity among studies.
RESULTS: The review of 8 studies, with a sample size of 397,298 participants, showed high heterogeneity (I2: 97.8 %). Therefore, the random effects method was used to analyze the results. The prevalence of bleeding after intervention in percutaneous coronary arteries was reported to be 4.4 % (95%CI: 2-9.1).
CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed a significant prevalence of bleeding after PCI, highlighting the need for health policymakers to pay more attention to the complications associated with PCI. Interventional cardiologists should consider the effective factors in these bleeding and how to treat and control them due to the importance of this complication.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for treating different types of post-extraction bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 24 January 2018), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 12), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 24 January 2018), Embase Ovid (1 May 2015 to 24 January 2018) and CINAHL EBSCO (1937 to 24 January 2018). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. We searched the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated any intervention for treating PEB, with male or female participants of any age, regardless of type of teeth (anterior or posterior, mandibular or maxillary). Trials could compare one type of intervention with another, with placebo, or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently screened search records. We obtained full papers for potentially relevant trials. If data had been extracted, we would have followed the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for the statistical analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any randomised controlled trial suitable for inclusion in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify any reports of randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effects of different interventions for the treatment of post-extraction bleeding. In view of the lack of reliable evidence on this topic, clinicians must use their clinical experience to determine the most appropriate means of treating this condition, depending on patient-related factors. There is a need for well designed and appropriately conducted clinical trials on this topic, which conform to the CONSORT statement (www.consort-statement.org/).
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of interventions for treating different types of post-extraction bleeding.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases: The Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 22 March 2016); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 2); MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 22 March 2016); CINAHL via EBSCO (1937 to 22 March 2016). Due to the ongoing Cochrane project to search EMBASE and add retrieved clinical trials to CENTRAL, we searched only the last 11 months of EMBASE via OVID (1 May 2015 to 22 March 2016). We placed no further restrictions on the language or date of publication. We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov), and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials (http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/default.aspx). We also checked the reference lists of excluded trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated any intervention for treating PEB, with male or female participants of any age, regardless of type of teeth (anterior or posterior, mandibular or maxillary). Trials could compare one type of intervention with another, with placebo, or with no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three pairs of review authors independently screened search records. We obtained full papers for potentially relevant trials. If data had been extracted, we would have followed the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions for the statistical analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: We did not find any randomised controlled trial suitable for inclusion in this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to identify any reports of randomised controlled trials that evaluated the effects of different interventions for the treatment of post-extraction bleeding. In view of the lack of reliable evidence on this topic, clinicians must use their clinical experience to determine the most appropriate means of treating this condition, depending on patient-related factors. There is a need for well designed and appropriately conducted clinical trials on this topic, which conform to the CONSORT statement (www.consort-statement.org/).
METHODS: This is a double-blind randomized clinical trial, involving 26 patients with CRSwNP, who underwent FESS for failed medical therapy. The intervention nostril was packed with ribbon gauze soaked in 500 mg/5 ml TXA. The control nostril was packed with ribbon gauze soaked in Moffett's solution, containing 2 ml 10% cocaine, 1 ml adrenaline 1:1000, and 4 ml 0.9% sodium bicarbonate. Both nostrils were packed for 15 min before FESS. Intraoperative bleeding was recorded in the initial 30 min after commencing the surgery. The recordings were reviewed by two surgeons using Boezaart's scoring system. The scores were taken at 15 and 30 min of surgery. The mean score was then calculated. At the end of the surgery, the intervention nostril was packed with Merocel® soaked in 500 mg/5 ml TXA and the control nostril was packed with Merocel® soaked in normal saline. The amount of bleeding within 24 h post-surgery was evaluated using a bolster gauze.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in intraoperative bleeding between the intervention (1.54 ± 0.71) and control nostrils (1.69 ± 0.55) with p = 0.172. The amount of bleeding in the postoperative period was significantly reduced in the intervention nostril (1.33 ± 0.55) compared to the control nostril saline (1.81 ± 0.48) with p = 0.001.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the nasal packing soaked in TXA reduced intraoperative and immediate postoperative bleeding. It is a safe, efficacious and cost-effective alternative to Moffett's solution during FESS and also an alternative to normal saline post-surgery among patients with CRSwNP.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: FF-2015-232, 2015.