2018
DOI: 10.1177/1558944718800731
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Use of tPA in the Treatment of Frostbite: A Systematic Review

Abstract: Due to the low scientific quality of the studies, the efficacy of tPA in reducing amputation rates cannot currently be established. Randomized, prospective trials or well-controlled cohort studies are needed to better assess the role of tPA. Consideration should be given to limiting its use to research protocols.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have read with interest the recently published article “The use of tPA in the Treatment of Frostbite: A systematic Review” by Dr. Richard Hutchison et al published in the January 2019 issue. 1 We applaud them for their efforts to study this difficult problem and agree with much of their findings. However, we believe their final recommendation to avoid the use of thrombolytics in frostbite patients unless conducting in an active research protocol may be misleading to readers.…”
supporting
confidence: 68%
“…We have read with interest the recently published article “The use of tPA in the Treatment of Frostbite: A systematic Review” by Dr. Richard Hutchison et al published in the January 2019 issue. 1 We applaud them for their efforts to study this difficult problem and agree with much of their findings. However, we believe their final recommendation to avoid the use of thrombolytics in frostbite patients unless conducting in an active research protocol may be misleading to readers.…”
supporting
confidence: 68%
“…The average level of evidence included is also low, at Level III. The included studies had an average MINORS score of 12.5 (range: [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] which is expected as this review included case reports, case series, and retrospective studies. Another important limitation of our work is that we cannot determine if thrombolysis preserved length of the amputated structures, thereby reducing the functional limitations of the amputations, or if it salvaged the soft tissue reducing the need for soft tissue reconstruction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although prior systematic reviews have been conducted on this topic previously, the focus of these prior reviews was to determine efficacy of thrombolysis, proper patient selection, and safety. [8][9][10][11] The findings of these prior reviews were clear: for patients presenting within 24 hours of injury, with failure of rapid rewarming, radiographic signs of a vascular defect and able to tolerate thrombolysis would benefit from thrombolysis. [8][9][10] However, none of these prior reviews have determined if the site of injury affects the treatment success.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonetheless, the tPA application route seems puzzling, the intra-arterial or intravenous delivery methods may result in various complications, and there is no statement to clarify the choice of application route. 14 More robust evidence and clear instructions are required in the future application of tPA. As for the time of thrombolytic intervention, it is recognized that thrombolytic therapy should be given as soon as possible after rewarming.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%