Quality of life of patients with hip fracture was better during the COVID-19 period than before, an ancillary study from the HiFIT multicenter study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a global impact on people life, notably because of lockdown periods. This could particularly affected patients suffering from hip fracture, who could have been more isolated during these periods. We aim at evaluating the impact of the COVID-19 period (including lockdown periods) on quality of life (QOL) in older adult patients 90 days after a surgery for a hip fracture. Subject and methods: Ancillary study of the prospective randomized controlled HiFIT study. We compared the QOL measured at 90 days after a hip fracture surgery using the EuroQOL-5 dimensions 3 levels (EQ-5D), the Perceived Quality of life (PQOL) and the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (IADL) in patients included in the Hifit study before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: The characteristics of the 161 patients included before and of the 213 included during the COVID period (including 122 (57%) during COVID with containment periods and 91 (43%) during COVID without containment periods) were similar (mean age 84 ± 10 years; 282 (75%) women). The majority (81%) of the patients alive at 90 days had returned to their previous place of residence in both periods. During the COVID period, EQ-5D showed better patient pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression levels. The PQOL happiness was not different, with around 81% of the patient being "happy" or "very happy" during the two periods and the IADL was also similar during the two periods. In the multivariate analysis odd ratios of having poorer outcomes were increased before COVID for pain/discomfort (OR 2.38, 95%CI [1.41-4.15], p = 0.001), anxiety (OR 1.89 [1.12-3.21], p = 0.017) and mobility (1.69 [1.02-2.86], p = 0.044). Conclusion: Patient's quality of life measured using different scales was not altered during the COVID period compared to before COVID, 90 days after a hip fracture. Surprisingly, the Pain/Discomfort and Anxiety dimensions of the EQ-5D questionnaires were even better during the COVID period.Clinical trial registration:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ (NCT02972294).

Ferric derisomaltose and tranexamic acid, combined or alone, for reducing blood transfusion in patients with hip fracture (the HiFIT trial): a multicentre, 2 × 2 factorial, randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anaemia and blood transfusion are associated with poor outcomes after hip fracture. We evaluated the efficacy of intravenous iron and tranexamic acid in reducing blood transfusions after hip fracture surgery. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, 2 × 2 factorial trial, we recruited adults hospitalised for hip fractures in 12 medical centres in France who had preoperative haemoglobin concentrations between 9·5 and 13·0 g/dL. We randomly allocated participants (1:1:1:1), via a secure web-based service, to ferric derisomaltose (20 mg/kg intravenously) and tranexamic acid (1 g bolus followed by 1 g over 8 h intravenously at inclusion and 3 g topically during surgery), iron plus placebo (normal saline), tranexamic acid plus placebo, or double placebo. Unmasked nurses administered study drugs; participants and other clinical and research staff remained masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients transfused during hospitalisation (or by day 30). The primary analysis included all randomised patients. This study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02972294) and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Of 413 patients (51-104 years old, median [IQR] 86 [78-91], 312 [76%] women, 101 [24%] men), 104 received iron plus tranexamic acid, 103 iron plus placebo, 103 tranexamic acid plus placebo, and 103 double placebo between March 31, 2017 and June 18, 2021 (study stopped early for efficacy after the planned interim analysis done on the first 390 patients included on May 25, 2021). Data for the primary outcome were available for all participants. Among patients on double placebo, 31 (30%) were transfused versus 16 (15%) on both drugs (relative risk 0·51 [98·3% CI 0·27-0·97]; p=0·012). 27 (26%) participants on iron (0·81 [0·50-1·29]; p=0·28) and 28 (27%) on tranexamic acid (0·85 [0·54-1·33]; p=0·39) were transfused. 487 adverse events were reported with similar event rates among the groups; among prespecified safety endpoints, severe postoperative anaemia (haemoglobin <8 g/dL) was more frequent in the double placebo group. Main common adverse event were sepsis, pneumonia, and urinary infection, with similar rates among all groups. INTERPRETATION: In patients hospitalised for hip fracture surgery with a haemoglobin concentration 9·5-13·0 g/dL, preoperative infusion of ferric derisomaltose plus tranexamic acid reduced the risk of blood transfusion by 50%. Our results suggest that combining treatments from two different pillars improves patient blood-management programmes. Either treatment alone did not reduce transfusion rates, but we might not have had the power to detect it. FUNDING: French Ministry of Health, HiFIT trial.

Study protocol for a multicentre, 2×2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial evaluating the interest of intravenous iron and tranexamic acid to reduce blood transfusion in hip fracture patients (the HiFIT study).

INTRODUCTION: Blood transfusion and anaemia are frequent and are associated with poor outcomes in patients with hip fracture (HF). We hypothesised that preoperative intravenous iron and tranexamic acid (TXA) may reduce the transfusion rate in these patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The HiFIT study is a multicentre, 2×2 factorial, randomised, double-blinded, controlled trial evaluating the effect of iron isomaltoside (IIM) (20 mg/kg) vs placebo and of TXA (intravenously at inclusion and topically during surgery) versus placebo on transfusion rate during hospitalisation, in patients undergoing emergency surgery for HF and having a preoperative haemoglobin between 95 and 130 g/L. 780 patients are expected. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients receiving an allogenic blood transfusion of packed red blood cells from the day of surgery until hospital discharge (or until D30 if patient is still hospitalised). Enrolment started on March 2017 in 11 French hospitals. The study was stopped between July 2017 and August 2018 (because of investigation of serious AEs with IIM in Spain) and slowed down since March 2020 (COVID-19 crisis). The expected date of final follow-up is May 2022. Analyses of the intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations are planned. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The HiFIT trial protocol has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Comité de Protection des Personnes Ouest II and the French authorities (ANSM). It will be carried out according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and the Good Clinical Practice guidelines. The results will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences and publication in peer-reviewed journals. The HiFIT trial will be the largest study evaluating iron and TXA in patients with HF. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: clinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02972294; EudraCT Number 2016-003087-40.

The median effective analgesic dose (ED50) of ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block for analgesia in reversal of ileostomy: A double-blind up-down dose-finding study.

BACKGROUND: The transversus abdominis plane block has become popular since it has been combined with ultrasound-guided techniques. In abdominal surgery, and especially in subumbilical surgery, it improves postoperative analgesia and reduces morphine consumption. Although it has been shown to be an effective technique, there are wide variations in reported doses and volumes of local anaesthetic used. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to assess the median effective analgesic dose (ED50 = effective dose in 50% of patients) of ropivacaine in TAP blocks for patients undergoing reversal of ileostomy. DESIGN: A double-blind up-down dose-finding study. SETTING: French Teaching Hospital. PATIENTS: Twenty-six colorectal patients were included. INTERVENTIONS: After standardised general anaesthesia, a unilateral ultrasound-guided TAP block was performed on patients undergoing elective reversal of ileostomy using 20 ml of ropivacaine. Doses were predefined according to the up-and-down method. The first patient received a dose of 1.6 mg kg(-1). The dose adjustment interval was 0.2 ml kg(-1). The potentially toxic dose of 3 mg kg(-1) was never exceeded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary endpoint was pain (defined as 3 or higher on a numerical pain scale of 0 to 10) at rest 6 h after TAP block. RESULTS: Out of the twenty-six patients who were included in the study, the ED50 of ropivacaine in TAP block for patients undergoing reversal of ileostomy was 2.70 mg kg(-1) [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.37 to 3.03 mg kg(-1)]. CONCLUSION: The ED50 of ropivacaine in TAP blocks in reversal of ileostomy is close to the toxic threshold. Anaesthesiologists should always be aware of the systemic toxicity risk and use weight-based doses when performing a TAP block.