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.

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

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The ULTRA-trial showed that ultra-early and short-term tranexamic acid treatment after subarachnoid hemorrhage did not improve clinical outcome at six months. An expected proportion of the included patients had non-aneurysmal 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 six months. METHODS: The 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 non-contrast computer tomography, 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 six months, assessed by the modified Rankin Scale, dichotomized into good (0-3) and poor (4-6) outcome. RESULTS: Of the 813 ULTRA-trial patients who had 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% confidence interval (C.I.) 0·69 to 1·24). None of the secondary outcomes showed significant differences between the treatment groups: excellent clinical outcome (mRS 0-2) aOR 0.76, 95% C.I. 0.57-1.03, all-cause mortality at 30 days aOR 0.91, 95% C.I. 0.65-1.28), all-cause mortality at six months aOR 1.10 (95% C.I. 0.80-1.52). DISCUSSION: Ultra-early and short-term tranexamic acid treatment did not improve clinical outcome at six months in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and therefore, cannot be recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02684812; submission date February 18, 2016, first patient enrollment on July 24th, 2013). CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This 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.

Stereotactic cyst aspiration directly followed by Gamma Knife radiosurgery for large cystic brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Gamma Knife radiosurgery (GKRS) has been proven to be a successful primary treatment for metastatic brain tumors (BM). BM can come in cystic lesions and are often too large for GKRS. An alternative approach to treat cystic BM is stereotactic cyst aspiration (SCA) for volume reduction, making it suitable for GKRS afterwards. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is evaluation of volumetric reduction after SCA, tumor control, and complications after SCA directly followed by GKRS. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent SCA directly followed by GKRS at the Gamma Knife Center of the Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital in Tilburg between 2002 and 2015. In total, 54 patients had undergone this combined approach. Two patients were excluded because of prior intracranial treatment. The other 52 patients were included for analysis. RESULTS: SCA resulted in a mean volumetric reduction of 56.5% (range 5.50-87.00%). In 83.6% of the tumors (46 tumors), SCA led to sufficient volumetric reduction making GKRS possible. The overall local tumor control (OLTC) of the aspirated lesions post-GKRS was 60.9% (28 out of 46 tumors). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients were 3 (range 5 days-14 months) and 12 months (range 5 days-58 months), respectively. Leptomeningeal disease was reported in 5 (9.6%) cases. CONCLUSION: SCA directly followed by GKRS is an effective and time-efficient treatment for large cystic BM in selected patients in which surgery is contraindicated and those with deeply located lesions.