Aprotinin therapy for reoperative myocardial revascularization: a placebo-controlled study.

We tested the efficacy and safety of aprotinin in 169 patients undergoing isolated reoperative myocardial revascularization. Patients were randomly assigned to high-dose aprotinin, low-dose aprotinin, or placebo treatment groups in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Treatment groups did not differ significantly with respect to age, sex, red cell mass, number of grafts, use of internal thoracic artery, or incidence of preoperative aspirin therapy. Patients treated with aprotinin had a significant reduction in postoperative chest tube drainage (720 +/- 753, 866 +/- 1,636, and 1,121 +/- 683 mL, respectively, for high-dose aprotinin, low-dose aprotinin, and placebo; p < 0.001). Transfusion requirements were reduced in aprotinin-treated patients (2.1 +/- 4.2, 4.8 +/- 11.8, and 4.1 +/- 6.2 units for high-dose, low-dose, and placebo, respectively; p < 0.001). A similar reduction in chest tube drainage and transfusion requirements was seen in patients using aspirin preoperatively. Q-wave myocardial infarctions were increased in the aprotinin subgroups (17.5%, 14.3%, and 8.9% for high-dose, low-dose, and placebo groups; not significant). Acute vein graft thrombosis was found in six of 12 vein grafts studied at postmortem examination in patients receiving aprotinin but not in any of five grafts in patients receiving placebo. We conclude that aprotinin is extremely effective in reducing bleeding and transfusion requirements and may increase the risk of graft thrombosis.     

Aprotinin decreases exposure to allogeneic blood during primary unilateral total hip replacement

BACKGROUND: Aprotinin, a hemostatic agent, regulates fibrinolysis, modulates the intrinsic coagulation pathway, stabilizes platelet function, and exhibits anti-inflammatory properties through inhibition of serine proteases, such as trypsin, plasmin, and kallikrein. Aprotinin has been used successfully for many years in cardiac operations, and there have been preliminary investigations of its use in hip replacement operations. The objectives of this multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aprotinin as a blood-sparing agent in patients undergoing an elective primary unilateral total hip replacement and to examine its effect on the prevalence of deep-vein thrombosis in this population. METHODS: Seventy-three patients received a placebo; seventy-six patients, a low dose of aprotinin (a load of 500,000 kallikrein inhibitor units [KIU]); seventy-five, a medium dose of aprotinin (a load of 1,000,000 KIU, with infusion of 250,000 KIU per hour); and seventy-seven patients, a high dose of aprotinin (a load of 2,000,000 KIU, with infusion of 500,000 KIU per hour). The end points for the determination of efficacy were transfusion requirements and blood loss. Patients received standard prophylaxis against deep-vein thrombosis and underwent compression ultrasonography with color Doppler imaging of the proximal and distal venous systems of both legs to evaluate for the presence of deep-vein thrombosis. RESULTS: Aprotinin reduced the percentages of patients who required any form of blood transfusion (47 percent of the patients managed with a placebo needed a transfusion compared with 28 percent of those managed with low-dose aprotinin [p = 0.02],27 percent of those managed with high-dose aprotinin [p = 0.008], and 40 percent of those managed with medium-dose aprotinin [p = 0.5]). Only 6 percent (twelve) of the 212 patients treated with aprotinin required allogeneic blood compared with 15 percent (ten) of the sixty-eight patients treated with the placebo (p = 0.03). Aprotinin decreased the estimated intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.02 for the low-dose group, p = 0.04 for the medium-dose group, and p = 0.1 for the high-dose group), the measured postoperative drainage volume (p = 0.4 for the low-dose group, p = 0.006 for the medium-dose group, and p = 0.000 for the high-dose group), and the mean reduction in the hemoglobin level on the second postoperative day (thirty-four grams per liter for the placebo group, twenty-eight grams per liter for the low-dose group [p = 0.000], twenty-six grams per liter for the medium-dose group [p = 0.000], and twenty-three grams per liter for the high-dose group [p = 0.0001). The rate of deep-vein thrombosis was similar for all groups. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that aprotinin is safe and effective for use as a hemostatic agent in primary unilateral total hip replacements. In patients who are at high risk of receiving allogeneic blood, use of aprotinin may be of particular clinical and economic benefit.     

Cost analysis of aprotinin for coronary artery bypass patients: analysis of the randomized trials

BACKGROUND: The full kallikrein-inhibiting dose of aprotinin has been shown to reduce blood loss, transfusion requirements, and the systemic inflammatory response associated with cardiopulmonary bypass graft surgery (CABG). A half-dose regimen, although having a reduced delivery cost, inhibits plasmin and fibrinolysis without substantially effecting kallikrein-mediated inflammation associated with bypass surgery. The differing pharmacologic effects of the two regimens impact the decision-making process. The current study assessed the medical cost offset of full-dose and half-dose aprotinin from short- and long-term perspectives to provide a rational decision-making framework for clinicians. METHODS: To estimate CABG admission costs, resource utilization and clinical data from aprotinin clinical trials were combined with unit costs estimated from a Duke University-based cost model. Lifetime medical costs of stroke and acute myocardial infarction were based on previous research. RESULTS: Relative to placebo, the differences in total perioperative cost for primary CABG patients receiving full-dose or half-dose aprotinin were not significant. When lifetime medical costs of complications were considered, total costs in full-dose and half-dose aprotinin-treated patients were not different relative to that of placebo. Total perioperative cost was significantly lower for repeat CABG patients treated with aprotinin, with savings of $2,058 for full-dose and $2,122 for half-dose patients when compared with placebo. Taking lifetime costs of stroke and acute myocardial infarction into consideration, the cost savings estimates were $6,044 for full-dose patients and $4,483 for half-dose patients, due to substantially higher lifetime stroke costs incurred by the placebo patients. CONCLUSIONS: Using this cost model, use of full-dose and half-dose aprotinin in primary CABG patients was cost neutral during hospital admission, whereas both dosing regimens were significantly cost saving in reoperative CABG patients. Additional lifetime cost savings were realized relative to placebo due to reduced complication costs, particularly with the full-dose regimen. As the full kallikrein-inhibiting dose of aprotinin has been shown to be safe and effective, the current results support its use in both primary and repeat CABG surgery. No demonstrable economic advantage was observed with the half-dose aprotinin regimen.     

Low-dose aprotinin is ineffective to treat excessive bleeding after cardiopulmonary bypass

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled clinical experience at our institution suggested that low-dose aprotinin could control excessive bleeding after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). A randomized clinical trial was conducted to determine the efficacy of low-dose aprotinin in the treatment of hemorrhage after cardiac surgery. METHODS: One hundred seventy-one patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB were included. Forty-four patients (26%) bled significantly in the intensive care unit (>100 mL/h) and received either aprotinin (200,000 KIU bolus + 100,000 KIU/h for 8 hours) or placebo in addition to our standard management of excessive bleeding. RESULTS: Median bleeding before study drug administration was not different between aprotinin (200 mL) and placebo (212.5 mL) groups. Bleeding decreased significantly with time and similarly in both groups. Ninety-five percent of patients required transfusions in both groups. Median blood products transfused were 13 and 8 units per patient in the aprotinin and placebo groups respectively (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Routine administration of low-dose aprotinin as part of the treatment protocol to control hemorrhage after CPB does not reduce bleeding or transfusion requirements and, therefore, cannot be recommended.     

抑肽酶剂量对体外循环炎性反应的作用及影响

目的：观察不同剂量抑肽酶对体外循环（ＣＰＢ）心脏手术炎性反应的作用及差异。方法：３２例拉膜置换病人,随机双盲分为３组：对照组、抑肽酶小剂量组、抑肽酶大剂量组,分别于ＣＰＢ前、ＣＰＢ结束、停机后２h取桡动脉血,测定中性粒细胞ＣＤ１１b表达及细胞因子ＴＮＦ－α、ＩＬ－６血浆清凉,:凶肽酶大剂量组中性粒细胞ＣＤ１１b的表达,细胞因子ＴＮＦ－α血浆水平各时间点无明变化,且ＩＬ－６释放减少,小剂量抑肽酶只在停机后２h部分下调ＣＤ１１b表达及降低ＴＮＦ－α血浆水平,两组相比,小剂量抑肽酶作用明显减弱,结论：抑肽酶的抗赕作用存在量效关系,大剂量抑肽酶的效能好于小剂量抑肽酶。     

Reduced inotropic support after aprotinin therapy during pediatric cardiac operations

BACKGROUND: Several reports indicate that aprotinin treatment before and during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) might have a protective effect on the myocardium. We evaluated the hemodynamic effects of perioperative aprotinin treatment. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in 34 infants (mean age, 2.5 years) who had cardiac operations. Half of the patients received high-dose aprotinin therapy. There were no significant differences between the aprotinin and placebo groups with respect to age, weight, sex, aortic cross-clamp time, and CPB time. The following data were recorded at arrival in the intensive care unit 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after termination of CPB: heart rate, blood pressure, left atrial pressure, central-peripheral temperature difference, arterial-central venous oxygen saturation difference, urine output, serum creatinine, lactate and neutrophil elastase levels, the Doppler echocardiographic factors shortening fraction and preejection period/left-ventricular ejection time, and cumulative doses of catecholamines (epinephrine), enoximone, and furosemide. RESULTS: No hemodynamic variable showed any significant difference between aprotinin and placebo groups. Urine output, creatinine, lactate, and elastase levels, as well as the cumulative doses of furosemide and epinephrine were not significantly different. Twelve hours after CPB 10 patients in the placebo group and 4 in the aprotinin group had received enoximone (p<0.05). The placebo group had received significantly larger doses of enoximone than the aprotinin group at arrival in the intensive care unit (0.13+/-0.05 versus 0 mg/kg), 12 hours after CPB (0.58+/-0.14 versus 0.18+/-0.09 mg/kg), 24 hours after CPB (1.11+/-0.24 versus 0.42+/-0.16 mg/kg), and 48 hours after CPB (1.61+/-0.40 versus 0.86+/-0.28). At 6 hours the difference did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and hemodynamic status of the aprotinin-treated patients was similar to that of the placebo-treated patients in the first 48 hours after CPB. The placebo group, however, required significantly more inotropic support by enoximone than the aprotinin group to achieve this goal.     

Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Study of an Ultra-Low-Dose Aprotinin Regimen in Reoperative and/or Complex Cardiac Operations

A bstract Background and aim of the study : High-dose aprotinin is an effective but costly method to reduce transfusions after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Very low doses of aprotinin have been shown to be effective in primary cardiac surgery, but not in patients undergoing procedures associated with the greatest usage of allogeneic blood products after CPB. We evaluated the efficacy of ultra-low-dose aprotinin in this patient population. Methods : Aprotinin 1 million KIU or placebo was added to the priming solution of the CPB circuit of 52 patients undergoing a reoperation and/or a complex surgical procedure. Dryness of operative field, hemoglobin concentrations, coagulation parameters, chest drainage, and transfusion requirements were compared. Results : Total chest drainage was not different between groups, but fewer patients in the aprotinin group required additional protamine postoperatively (35% vs 69% for controls, p = 0.03) and fewer received fresh frozen plasma (FFP; 19% vs 46% for controls, p = 0.04). Red cell transfusion was smaller in the aprotinin group compared to placebo (median 4 and 2 units, respectively, p = 0.04). Transfusion of FFP, platelets, cryoprecipitates was not different between groups. Total number of units transfused tended to be reduced in the aprotinin group compared to control (median 2 and 7 units, respectively, p = 0.06). Conclusions : Prophylactic administration of ultra-low-dose aprotinin reduced transfusions in patients undergoing repeat operations or complex procedures. Aprotinin could be used in a more economical manner, even in this patient population at high-risk of receiving allogeneic blood products.     

Aprotinin for Primary Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Multicenter Trial of Three Dose Regimens

Background. High-dose aprotinin reduces transfusion requirements in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting, but the safety and effectiveness of smaller doses is unclear. Furthermore, patient selection criteria for optimal use of the drug are not well defined.

Methods. Seven hundred and four first-time coronary artery bypass grafting patients were randomized to receive one of three doses of aprotinin (high, low, and pump-prime-only) or placebo. The patients were stratified as to risk of excessive bleeding.

Results. All three aprotinin doses were highly effective in reducing bleeding and transfusion requirements. Consistent efficacy was not, however, demonstrated in the subgroup of patients at low risk for bleeding. There were no differences in mortality or the incidences of renal failure, strokes, or definite myocardial infarctions between the groups, although the pump-prime-only dose was associated with a small increase in definite, probable, or possible myocardial infarctions (p = 0.045).

Conclusions. Low-dose and pump-prime-only aprotinin regimens provide reductions in bleeding and transfusion requirements that are similar to those of high-dose regimens. Although safe, aprotinin is not routinely indicated for the first-time coronary artery bypass grafting patient who is at low risk for postoperative bleeding. The pump-prime-only dose is not currently recommended because of a possible association with more frequent myocardial infarctions.     

High-dose aprotinin in cardiac surgery: is high-dose high enough? An analysis of 8281 cardiac surgical patients treated with aprotinin

In this retrospective analysis we tested the hypothesis that aprotinin doses of more than 6 x 10(6) kallikrein inhibiting units (KIU) per patient may be more effective in reducing bleeding compared with the high-dose regimen of 5-6 x 10(6) KIU aprotinin. The aprotinin doses administered for 8281 adult cardiac surgical patients were correlated to body weight and time of operation and calculated in KIU per kg body weight and minute of operation. Linear and logistic regression models were designed to detect potential associations between dose and postoperative bleeding, transfusion, and other covariates. The 6-h chest tube drainage in the lowest quartile dosing group was 447 +/- 319 mL (mean +/- sd) compared with 360 +/- 290 mL in the highest quartile dosing group (P < 0.001). The proportion of patients requiring allogeneic blood transfusion was reduced from 55% to 47% comparing the lowest with the highest dosing group (P < 0.01). Aprotinin dose was also an independent predictor for rethoracotomy for surgical hemostasis (1.9% in the highest quartile to 2.4% in the lowest dosing quartile; P < 0.01). The risk of renal failure requiring dialysis (2.3% in the highest dosing group vs 3.3% in the lowest dosing group; P < 0.01) or impairment of renal function (creatinine increase of >or=2 mg/dL postoperatively, 6.4% in the highest dosing group vs 10.0% in the lowest dosing group; P < 0.01) was lower with higher doses of aprotinin. Thus, there was no association between aprotinin dose and renal function. Our results support the hypothesis that a more individualized aprotinin regimen with potentially higher doses may optimize the effectiveness of aprotinin therapy in cardiac surgery.     

Influence of aprotinin on early graft thrombosis in patients undergoing myocardial revascularization

One hundred sixty-five patients undergoing primary myocardial revascularization were prospectivelyentered into a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, in a single institution, in order to determine the influence of high- and low-dose aprotinin application on early coronary artery bypass graft patency. All patients were operated on by the same team and the three treatment groups were comparable in all demographic data and surgical variables. Postoperative chest tube drainage and transfusion requirements were significantly reduced in patients receiving high or low doses of aprotinin. In all patients vein and internal mammary artery graft patency was assessed by control coronary angiograms 4 to 15 days (median 8.2 days) postoperatively. In the high-dose aprotinin group, 140 of 142 vein grafts and in the low-dose aprotinin group all of the 128 vein grafts were patent compared with 138 of 139 in the placebo group. The difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). All pedicled internal mammary artery grafts were patent in the three treatment groups. The prevalence of perioperative myocardial infarction was evaluated by serial creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) isoenzyme measurements and by electrocardiographic recordings. No additional changes that could be attributed to aprotinin were observed. In conclusion, these results suggest that perioperative myocardial infraction secondary to aprotinin-induced native coronary artery or conduit thrombosis is not increased by aprotinin in patients undergoing primary myocardial revascularization.     

Kidney-specific proteins in patients receiving aprotinin at high- and low-dose regimens during coronary artery bypass graft with cardiopulmonary bypass

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim was to determine whether the administration of aprotinin can cause deleterious effects on renal function in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). METHODS: Sixty consecutive patients with normal preoperative renal function undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery with CPB using the same anaesthetic; CPB and surgical protocols were randomized into three groups. Patients received placebo (Group 1), low-dose aprotinin (Group 2) or high-dose aprotinin (Group 3). Renal parameters measured were plasma creatinine, alpha1-microglobulin and beta-glucosaminidase (beta-NAG) excretion. Measurements were performed before surgery, during CPB and 24 and 72 h, and 7 and 40 days postoperatively. RESULTS: In the three groups, alpha1-microglobulin and beta-NAG excretions significantly increased during CPB, at 24 and 72 h, and 7 days postoperatively (P < 0.05) and had returned to preoperative levels at postoperative day 40. Plasma creatinine levels were within normal values at times recorded. In Groups 2 and 3, alpha1-microglobulin excretion during CPB was significantly higher than in Group 1 (P < 0.001), and 24h after surgery it still remained significantly higher in Group 3 compared to Groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Aprotinin caused a significant increase in alpha1-microglobulin excretion but not in beta-NAG excretion during CPB, which may be interpreted as a greater renal tubular overload without tubular damage. This effect persisted for 24 h after surgery when high-dose aprotinin doses had been administered. Creatinine plasma levels were not sensitive to detect these prolonged renal effects in our study.     

Low-dose aprotinin infusion is not clinically useful to reduce bleeding and transfusion of homologous blood products in high-risk cardiac surgical patients

A high-dose regimen of aprotinin 5–6 million KIU is effective in reducing bleeding and the need for homologous blood products (HBP) associated with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). These high doses aim at achieving plasmin and plasma kallikrein concentrations which in vitro are inhibitory but, theoretically, smaller doses could suffice in vivo. Also, aprotinin is an expensive drug, so efficiency requires using the smallest effective dose. Therefore, the efficacy of prophylactic aprotinin 1 million KIU (the maximal dose approved currently) was evaluated in a patient population at high risk of bleeding and of being transfused. Forty-one patients undergoing reoperation or a complex surgical procedure were included in a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Before skin incision, a bolus of 200,000 KIU aprotinin was administered in 20 min, followed by an infusion of 100,000 KIU· hr^?1 over eight hours. Control patients received an equal volume of saline. Dryness of the operative field, chest drainage, transfusion of HBP, haemoglobin concentrations, and coagulation variables (including bleeding time) were compared. There were no differences between aprotinin and placebo-treated patients for all clinical and laboratory variables. The apparent ineffectiveness of aprotinin may be explained by the use of an insufficient dose, by a different protocol of administration (e.g., no bolus in CPB prime), or by the inability of aprotinin to decrease bleeding and transfusions any further. Also, the number of patients studied does not exclude the possibility of a Type II error. However, based on the small differences observed, we conclude that low-dose aprotinin infusion is not useful clinically to reduce chest drainage and transfusions in a patient population at high risk of being exposed to HBP.     

Economic analysis of basiliximab in renal transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Basiliximab is a chimeric monoclonal directed against the alpha-chain of the interleukin-2 receptor. International studies have shown that it is highly effective in preventing acute rejection in patients receiving Neoral, and causes no measurable incremental toxicity, but its economic value remains unknown. METHODS: This study employed an economic model to examine the potential economic benefit of basiliximab. Parameter estimates were derived from a randomized, prospective, double-blind study conducted in 21 renal transplant centers in seven countries in which 380 adult primary allograft recipients were randomized within center to receive basiliximab (20 mg i.v.) on days 0 and 4 or placebo in addition to dual immunosuppression with Neoral and steroids. Key clinical events included primary hospitalization, immunosuppressive drug use, patient and graft survival, graft rejection, treatment of rejection, dialysis, and repeat hospitalization. Health resources were valued via a comprehensive electronic cost dictionary, based upon a detailed economic evaluation of renal transplantation in Canada. Medication costs were calculated from hospital pharmacy acquisition costs; basiliximab was assessed a zero cost. RESULTS: The average estimated cost per patient for the first year after transplant was $55,393 (Canadian dollars) for placebo and $50,839 for basiliximab, rising to $141,690 and $130,592, respectively, after 5 years. A principal component of the cost in both groups was accrued during the initial transplant hospitalization ($14,663 for standard therapy and $14,099 for basiliximab). An additional $15,852 and $14,130 was attributable to continued care, graft loss, and dialysis in the two groups, whereas follow-up hospitalization consumed an additional $15,538 for placebo and $13,916 for basiliximab. The mean incremental cost of dialysis was $5,397 for placebo compared with $3,821 for basiliximab, whereas incremental costs of graft loss were $2,548 compared with $2,295 in the two treatment groups. The principal costs associated with repeat admission to the transplant ward and the general ward were marginally higher for placebo ($7,395 vs. $6,300 and $5,986 vs. $4,625). Treatment of acute rejection and maintenance immunosuppressive drug use were associated with only limited savings as a result of basiliximab (savings <$200 each). Sensitivity analysis indicated that the most influential parameters affecting the savings as a result of using basiliximab were a reduction in the duration of initial and repeat hospitalization followed by the reduced risks of acute rejection and graft loss. CONCLUSIONS: Before accounting for the cost of the therapy itself, basiliximab produces an estimated economic saving of $4,554 during the first year after transplant, of which $3,344 is attributable to the reduced costs of graft dysfunction, including graft loss and dialysis ($1,722) and follow-up hospitalizations ($1,622). When marketed, basiliximab is expected to cost approximately $3,000 per course (two doses of 20 mg), resulting in a net first-year saving of $1,554. Under these circumstances, basiliximab can be considered a dominant therapy in renal transplantation.     

Randomized, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the use of aprotinin in the repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. On behalf of the Joint Vascular Research Group

BACKGROUND: The use of aprotinin in cardiac surgery reduces blood transfusion requirements. The aim of this trial was to see whether the same benefit applies in the repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). METHODS: In this prospective, randomized trial, nine centres with local ethics committee approval recruited 77 patients with a ruptured AAA. A bolus of aprotinin 2 x 106 units, followed by an infusion of 0.5 x 106 units every 30 min, was administered to 38 patients, and 39 received a placebo infusion. The quantity of blood products transfused during surgery and in the first 12 h after operation was noted, along with the incidence of complications, mortality rates and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Seventeen of the 38 patients who received aprotinin and 17 of the 39 given placebo died within 30 days (overall mortality rate 44 per cent). The median amount of blood given to the aprotinin group after operation was 1 (range 0-14) unit, while for the placebo group it was 3 (range 0-13) units (P = 0.02). However, the difference in the total number of units of blood transfused did not reach significance (10 (range 2-29) versus 14 (range 4-38) units respectively). CONCLUSION: The use of high-dose aprotinin during the repair of a ruptured AAA reduced blood transfusion requirements in the first 12 h after operation, but had no significant effect on the overall blood transfusion requirement.     

Efficacy of aprotinin in children undergoing craniofacial surgery

OBJECT: This prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was undertaken to assess the efficacy of aprotinin in reducing the need for blood transfusions in 39 children undergoing reconstructive craniofacial surgery. METHODS: Two demographically similar groups--a total of 39 patients with a mean age of 1.2 +/- 1.2 years--were studied. The efficacy of aprotinin (240 mg/m2 administered intravenously over 20 minutes, followed by infusions of 56 mg/m2/hr) was compared with that of an equal infusion of 0.9% saline (placebo). Patients in the aprotinin group received less blood per kilogram of body weight than patients in the placebo group (32 +/- 25 ml/kg compared with 52 +/- 34 m/kg, respectively; p = 0.04). Those patients in whom aprotinin was administered experienced less change in their hematocrit levels during surgery (aprotinin -33 +/- 13% compared with placebo -44 +/- 9%, p = 0.01). Each patient underwent a transfusion as per study protocol, and there was no significant change in hematocrit levels from the beginning to the end of surgery. The surgical faculty judged blood loss in patients in the aprotinin group to be significantly less than usual (p = 0.03). The use of aprotinin was also associated with reduced blood transfusion requirements during the first 3 postoperative days (p = 0.03). There was no adverse event reported in either the aprotinin or placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Aprotinin decreased blood transfusion requirements in pediatric patients undergoing craniofacial reconstruction, thereby reducing the risks associated with exposure to banked blood components.     

Reduction of blood transfusion need with aprotinin in orthopedic surgery. Spanish Study Group on the Use of Aprotinin in Hip Arthroplasty (GEEEAAC)

Aprotinin is a protease inhibitor of interest for its antifibrinolytic effect of reducing perioperative bleeding in certain types of surgery, with wide use in heart surgery, liver transplantation and vascular surgery. The application of aprotinin during orthopedic surgery has recently been suggested. Such use is controversial, as there is lack of consensus as to the type of patient for whom aprotinin administration would be indicated, the surgical procedure during which it would be most effective (hip or knee arthroplasty, spinal arthrodesis, major tumor or septic surgery), the doses to administer, its safety and its real efficacy for conserving homologous blood. That is to say, there is no agreement as to the cost/benefit relation of aprotinin for the various types of orthopedic surgery. This critical review of the literature leads to the conclusion that aprotinin is a promising drug for use in orthopedic surgery, given that published studies have established the benefit in blood product savings and decreased blood loss during surgery.     

Effect of recombinant aprotinin on postoperative blood loss and coronary vascular function in a canine model of cardiopulmonary bypass.

OBJECTIVE: Aprotinin is a widely used serine protease inhibitor during cardiopulmonary bypass to reduce blood loss and preserve platelet function. However, the bovine-derived aprotinin can induce hypersensitivity reaction with fatal complications. Furthermore, vascular effects of aprotinin are not completely elucidated. The current study is designed to investigate the effects of recently developed recombinant aprotinin on blood loss and coronary vascular function in a clinically relevant canine model of cardiopulmonary bypass without aortic cross-clamping and cardioplegia. METHODS: Twenty-four dogs underwent cardiopulmonary bypass without aortic cross-clamping and cardioplegia. Dogs were divided into three groups in a blinded fashion: control animals (n=8) received placebo, aprotinin treatment groups received bovine (n=8) or recombinant aprotinin (n=8) according to the Hammersmith method. The doses of bovine and recombinant aprotinin were the same. Coagulation parameters and blood loss were measured regularly at different time points. Endothelium-dependent and -independent vasorelaxation were investigated in isolated left anterior descendent coronary arterial rings by using acetylcholine and bradykinin or sodium nitroprusside and adenosine, respectively. RESULTS: Postoperative blood loss was significantly reduced in the aprotinin-treated groups in comparison to control and there was no significant difference between the two aprotinin-treated groups. Endothelium-dependent relaxation of coronary arteries to acetylcholine and bradykinin was unaffected in the aprotinin treatment groups. Both types of aprotinin significantly increased vasorelaxation to adenosine when compared with controls, but did not affect that to sodium nitroprusside. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of recombinant aprotinin on blood loss was equivalent to bovine-derived aprotinin. Neither types of aprotinin impaired endothelium-dependent relaxation in a canine model of cardiopulmonary bypass.     

Aminocaproic Acid (Amicar) as an Alternative to Aprotinin (Trasylol) in Liver Transplantation

Introduction

This study compared clinical outcomes for a large number of liver transplant patients receiving intraoperative epsilon-aminocaproic acid (EACA), aprotinin, or no antifibrinolytic agent over an 8-year period.

Patients and Methods

Records for deceased donor liver transplants were reviewed. Data included antifibrinolytic agent, blood loss, early graft function, and postoperative complications. Study groups included low-dose aprotinin, high-dose aprotinin, EACA (25 mg/kg, 1-hour infusion), or no antifibrinolytic agent.

Results

Data were included for 1170 consecutive transplants. Groups included low-dose aprotinin (n = 324 [28%]), high-dose aprotinin (n = 308 [26%]), EACA (n = 216 [18%]), or no antifibrinolytic (n = 322 [28%]). EACA had the lowest intraoperative blood loss and required the fewest transfusions of plasma. Patients receiving no agent required the most blood transfusions. Early graft loss was lowest in the EACA group, and 90-day and 1-year patient survival rates were significantly higher for the low-dose aprotinin and EACA groups according to Cox regression. Complications were similar, but there were more episodes of deep vein thrombosis in patients receiving EACA.

Conclusions

These results suggest that transitioning from aprotinin to EACA did not result in worse outcomes. In addition to decreased intraoperative blood loss, a trend toward improved graft and patient survival was seen in patients receiving EACA.     

The efficacy and safety of aprotinin for hemostasis during intracranial surgery

OBJECT: The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of prophylactic high-dose intravenous aprotinin in reducing intraoperative blood loss in the neurosurgical population. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in parallel groups in two regional neurosurgical departments. One hundred patients with a preoperative diagnosis of intracranial meningioma or vestibular schwannoma subsequently confirmed on histological studies were included. All patients were older than 18 years of age, pregnancy had been excluded, there was no history of bleeding diathesis, no previous exposure to aprotinin, and no ingestion of antiplatelet or anticoagulant medications within the 2 weeks preceding surgery. Aprotinin was administered in doses of 30,000 kallikrein-inhibiting units (KIU)/kg body weight on induction of anesthesia and was continued as an infusion of 10,000 KIU/kg/hr until surgery was complete, or for a maximum of 8 hours. Intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion, the Glasgow Outcome Scale score, and the Index of Independence were measured, and screening for deep vein thrombosis and the Mini-Mental State Examination were performed. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative blood loss was reduced from 1014 ml (geometric mean) to 508 ml (p = 0.028). Although this study was not designed to evaluate the need for blood transfusion, 37 U of blood was used in 11 patients in the aprotinin group and 58 U in 13 patients in the placebo group (not significant). There were no significant differences in postoperative thrombotic risk or other outcome measures between treatment groups. Aprotinin therefore can be safely used to reduce intraoperative blood loss in patients who are not receiving anticoagulation therapy.     

Evidence-based review of the role of aprotinin in blood conservation during orthopaedic surgery

Aprotinin is a serine protease inhibitor with antifibrinolytic properties that has been approved as a blood-conserving drug in cardiac surgery by the United States Food and Drug Administration. On the basis of the current evidence from Level-I trials, we make a grade-A recommendation for use of the high-dose aprotinin regimen in hip and spine surgery. Because of conflicting data, the low-dose aprotinin therapy as well as the use of aprotinin in patients with cancer cannot be recommended (grade-I recommendation). High-quality randomized trials are necessary to determine the optimal (and minimal) therapeutic dose of aprotinin and the optimal time of aprotinin administration during surgery.