Tranexamic acid vs placebo: Thromboembolic events
Tranexamic acid probably leads to higher any thromboembolic event Clinical and radiological assessment compared with placebo (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Tranexamic acid vs placebo Any thromboembolic event Clinical and radiological assessment · patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding Tranexamic acid probably leads to higher any thromboembolic event Clinical and radiological assessment compared with placebo (moderate certainty). Tranexamic acid for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (2014) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.86 | 4 studies · 1095 participants | Moderate |
Tranexamic acid vs placebo Any thromboembolic event Number of patients with at least one thromboembolic event · patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding Tranexamic acid showed no clear difference in any thromboembolic event Number of patients with at least one… compared with placebo (low certainty). Tranexamic acid for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (2012) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD006640.PUB2, superseded | RR 1.86 [0.66, 5.24] | 3 studies · 1048 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tranexamic acid for upper gastrointestinal bleeding 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.