What data is available to support Afrin for the management of nosebleeds in the ambulatory setting? Are there other medications recommended for nosebleeds in the ambulatory setting?

Comment by InpharmD Researcher

Available evidence highlights Afrin (oxymetazoline) as an effective option for controlling nosebleeds (epistaxis), with reported success rates of 65-75%. Although data specific to ambulatory care are limited, outpatient management typically begins with conservative measures, such as direct nasal compression and a topical vasoconstrictor, like oxymetazoline. Additional agents utilized for epistaxis include phenylephrine, epinephrine, and tranexamic acid (TXA), each with varying efficacy and safety profiles. Notably, one prospective study reported oxymetazoline to be more effective than TXA and epinephrine-lidocaine in achieving rapid hemostasis and reducing recurrence (see Table 1).

Background

In 2020, the American Academy of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery Foundation published a comprehensive clinical practice guideline. Management of a nosebleed with an identified anterior nasal bleeding site involves several options. Initial therapy can include topical vasoconstrictors like oxymetazoline, phenylephrine, epinephrine, or cocaine, and nasal cautery. After bleeding stops, lubricants and moisturizers can prevent rebleeding. Oxymetazoline and phenylephrine are over-the-counter vasoconstrictors commonly used with a reported resolution rate of 65-75%. However, these agents may pose cardiac and systemic risks, especially in patients with hypertension, cardiac, or cerebrovascular conditions. In young children, oxymetazoline is used with caution, and more dilute phenylephrine solutions are available for younger ages. Though effective in controlling nasal bleeding, epinephrine's systemic absorption and potential cardiovascular effects make oxymetazoline preferable. Cocaine is rarely used due to potential cardiac side effects and abuse risks. A small trial showed no difference between antiseptic cream and nasal cautery for controlling epistaxis in children. In adults, topical vasoconstrictors followed by silver nitrate cautery were more effective than nasal pinching alone. The British Rhinological Society recommends cautery as the first-line treatment, with vasoconstrictors used beforehand despite low-quality evidence. Without high-quality evidence directing specific treatments, clinicians might opt for humidification, intranasal emollients, vasoconstrictor agents, or nasal cautery. Tranexamic acid (TXA), an antifibrinolytic agent, has shown effectiveness in controlling acute nosebleeds, particularly in patients on antiplatelet drugs. However, further research is needed to understand TXA's indications and efficacy, considering newer epistaxis treatment techniques with endoscopes and cautery. [1]

Several review articles describe a variety of treatment options for epistaxis, which involves bleeding from the nostrils, nasal cavity, or nasopharynx. Initial management often includes basic first aid measures such as applying external pressure and using ice packs. Topical vasoconstrictors like Afrin (oxymetazoline) are frequently effective, reportedly controlling 65-75% of nosebleeds in emergency settings. Electrocautery tends to be more effective than chemical cauterization, with lower rates of recurrence (approximately 14.5% versus 35.1%). Notably, TXA has demonstrated superior efficacy in promoting hemostasis, achieving control in about 78% of cases compared to 35% with oxymetazoline and 31% with nasal packing. Nasal packing remains a common intervention and can be performed with a range of materials. Non-absorbable options include petroleum jelly, bismuth iodoform paraffin paste (BIPP) gauze, polyvinyl alcohol nasal tampons such as Merocel, Foley catheters, and balloon devices like Rapid Rhino. Absorbable materials, such as Nasopore, offer an alternative with potential comfort benefits. Newer hemostatic agents, including Surgicel (oxidized regenerated cellulose), thrombin matrix (Floseal), gelatin sponge (Spongostan), and fibrin glue, have shown promising results, providing effective bleeding control with fewer complications. [2], [3]

For more persistent or severe bleeding, endoscopic interventions are increasingly utilized. Endoscopic ligation of arteries, particularly the sphenopalatine artery, yields higher success rates than traditional nasal packing (approximately 97% versus 62%). Endoscopic cauterization may offer even greater efficacy than ligation. In refractory cases, embolization serves as a minimally invasive alternative with a reported success rate around 80%, using materials such as gelatin sponge, foam, polyvinyl alcohol, or coils. Treatment selection should be individualized, taking into account the patient’s history, severity of bleeding, and available resources. The integration of newer hemostatic agents and endoscopic techniques appears to enhance outcomes compared to traditional methods. [2], [3]

When managing epistaxis in the outpatient setting, care typically follows a gradual escalation from conservative to more invasive approaches as needed. The initial step is to assess airway patency because brisk anterior bleeding can cause blood to pool in the posterior pharynx, increasing the risk of airway obstruction. Any suspicion of a compromised airway warrants urgent evaluation in an emergency setting. Once airway safety is confirmed, firm compression of both nostrils just below the nasal bones should be applied continuously for 10 to 15 minutes. This can be achieved by manual pinching or by using a homemade nasal clip fashioned from taped tongue depressors. Topical vasoconstrictors can complement compression; oxymetazoline may be sprayed directly into the nostrils, or cotton pledgets soaked in oxymetazoline or epinephrine 1:1,000 can be inserted to help control bleeding. However, caution is advised with epinephrine due to potential systemic absorption that may lead to elevated blood pressure and tachycardia. [2], [3], [4]

References:

[1] Tunkel DE, Anne S, Payne SC, et al. Clinical Practice Guideline: Nosebleed (Epistaxis). Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2020;162(1_suppl):S1-S38. doi:10.1177/0194599819890327
[2] Mylonas S, Skoulakis C, Nikolaidis V, Hajiioannou J. Epistaxis Treatment Options: Literature Review. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023;75(3):2235-2244. doi:10.1007/s12070-023-03824-z
[3] Seikaly H. Epistaxis. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(10):944-951. doi:10.1056/NEJMcp2019344
[4] Womack JP, Kropa J, Jimenez Stabile M. Epistaxis: Outpatient Management. Am Fam Physician. 2018;98(4):240-245.

Literature Review

A search of the published medical literature revealed 6 studies investigating the researchable question:

What data is available to support Afrin for the management of nosebleeds in the ambulatory setting? Are there other medications recommended for nosebleeds in the ambulatory setting?

Level of evidence

C - Multiple studies with limitations or conflicting results  Read more→



Please see Tables 1-6 for your response.


 

Comparison of the efficacy of oxymetazoline, tranexamic acid, and epinephrine-lidocaine combination in the treatment of epistaxis
Design

Prospective, single-center, observational, cohort trial

N= 373

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of local oxymetazoline, tranexamic acid, and epinephrine-lidocaine combination in the treatment of acute epistaxis and to compare the advantages of these treatments in controlling bleeding
Study Groups

Oxymetazoline (n= 97)

Tranexamic acid (n= 96)

Epinephrine-lidocaine (n= 91)

Inclusion Criteria Age ≥18 years; presentation to the emergency department with non-traumatic epistaxis
Exclusion Criteria Active pregnancy or breastfeeding; known allergies to the medications; history of nasal or pharyngeal trauma or nasopharyngeal surgery within the last month; congenital coagulopathy disorders; diagnosed hypertensive emergency at presentation; patients who refused treatment or left the hospital without permission
Methods Patients were first treated with direct pressure to the nasal alae for 15 min. If bleeding persisted, one of the three medications was applied locally according to the physician's clinical preference. Oxymetazoline was administered as a nasal spray containing 0.05% oxymetazoline hydrochloride. Tranexamic acid was diluted in sterile normal saline and applied via a soaked gauze pad. Epinephrine-lidocaine was prepared by combining 1 ml of 1% epinephrine and 1 ml of 2% lidocaine, applied via a soaked gauze pad. Hemostasis was assessed at five-minute intervals. 
Duration February 2022 to May 2024
Outcome Measures

Primary: Cessation of bleeding

Secondary: Time to achieve hemostasis, recurrent visits

Baseline Characteristics Demographic, Clinical, and Laboratory Data Epinephrine- Lidocaine (n = 91) Tranexamic acid (n = 96) Oxymetazoline (n = 97) p-value
Age, years 65 (51.5–74.5) 58 (47.8–68.5) 58 (45–69) 0.073
Male 53 (58%) 55 (57%) 53 (55%) 0.874
Anticoagulant therapy 23 (25%) 28 (29%) 27 (28%) 0.834
Hemoglobin, g/dL 12.6 (11.4–13.5) 13.3 (12.1–14.0) 13.3 (11.7–14.3) 0.051
Platelet, 109/L 255 (191–297.5) 275.5 (215.75–330.25) 275 (208.5–301.5) 0.105
International normalized ratio 1.12 (0.998–1.57) 1.20 (1.00–1.62) 1.08 (0.932–1.40) 0.124
Results Endpoint Epinephrine-Lidocaine (n = 91) Tranexamic acid (n = 96) Oxymetazoline (n = 97) p-value
Hemostasis success rate 49% (45/91) 55% (53/96) 71% (69/97) 0.007
Recurrent visits to the hospotal 31% (14/45) 26% (13/50) 10% (7/68) 0.016

Of the 373 patients, 89 (23.8%) achieved hemostasis with pressure therapy.

Time to hemostasis differed significantly among the three drugs (χ² = 11.5, p = 0.021, Cramer's V = 0.186), with a notable difference between oxymetazoline and tranexamic acid (χ² = 10.3, p = 0.006, Cramer's V = 0.292). No differences were observed in the other pairwise comparisons (data presented in figure).

Adverse Events No specific adverse events were reported in the study
Study Author Conclusions Oxymetazoline is superior to tranexamic acid and epinephrine-lidocaine in achieving rapid hemostasis and reducing recurrence in epistaxis. Its widespread use, easy accessibility, and rapid effect support its consideration as a practical and effective option in emergency departments. Further multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings
Critique The study's strengths include its prospective design and the use of a standardized protocol for medication application, which enhances the reliability of the findings. However, the single-center setting and non-randomized allocation of patients to treatment groups may limit the generalizability of the results. Additionally, the lack of independent observers to assess hemostasis and potential biases in outcome assessment are limitations. Future studies should consider randomization and include multiple centers to improve the robustness of the findings
References:

Çelik T, Altun M, Kudu E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of oxymetazoline, tranexamic acid, and epinephrine-lidocaine combination in the treatment of epistaxis. Am J Emerg Med. 2025;91:104-109. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2025.02.036

 

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF TOPICALLY ADMINISTERED TRANEXAMIC ACID VERSUS TOPICAL OXYMETAZOLINE SPRAY FOR ACHIEVING HEMOSTASIS IN EPISTAXIS
Design

Prospective, single-blinded study

N= 38

Objective

To compare the efficacy of the intravenous formulation of tranexamic acid (TXA) applied topically versus the vasoconstrictor oxymetazoline applied topically in achieving hemostasis in patients presenting to the emergency department with anterior epistaxis

Study Groups

TXA group (n= 18)

Oxymetazoline group (n= 20)

Inclusion Criteria

Patients >18 years of age presenting to the ED with new or acute anterior epistaxis

Exclusion Criteria

Pregnant or breastfeeding patients, nonpostmenopausal women, patients with recent nose or pharynx surgery, facial injuries from trauma, history of hemophilia, blood pressure >200/120 mmHg, known allergy to TXA or oxymetazoline, posterior epistaxis

Methods

Patients were allocated into two treatment groups based on the day of the month: odd-numbered days for oxymetazoline and even-numbered days for TXA. The TXA group received 3 mL of intravenous TXA 1000 mg/10 mL through an atomizer, while the oxymetazoline group received 3 sprays of oxymetazoline hydrochloride 0.05%. Direct pressure was applied after drug administration. Assessment for bleeding was performed at intervals up to 30 minutes.

Duration

January 2016 to January 2018

Outcome Measures

Primary: Proportion of patients achieving hemostasis with initial therapy

Secondary: Frequency of rebleeding in the ED, requirement for inpatient admission, and second-line treatment choice

Baseline Characteristics   TXA (n= 18)

Oxymetazoline (n= 20)

Average age, year 71.4 ± 14.6

65.8 ± 14.9

Male

9 (50%)

9 (45%)
Antiplatelet therapy*

7 (39%)

9 (45%%)

Anticoagulant therapy**

4 (22.2%) 9 (45)

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy

2 (11.1%) 1 (5.0%)

*aspirin, clopidogrel

**warfarin, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or dabigatran

Results

Endpoints

TXA (n= 18) Oxymetazoline (n= 20)

Hemostasis achieved

95% CI

14 (77.8%)

52.4 to 93.6

7 (35.0%)

14.1 to 55.9

Average time to hemostasis, min

95% CI

17.9 ± 10.5

14.5 to 21.2

16.4 ± 6.3

10.2 to 22.7

Average ED LOS, min

95% CI

104.7 ± 30.0

74.7 to 134.7

137.1 ± 50.4

86.7 to 187.5

Rebleed in ED before discharge

2 (11.1%)

0 (0%)

Admissions requirement 

0 (0%)

1 (5%)

 

CI= confidence interval; ED= emergency department; LOS= length of stay

Among patients requiring secondary treatment, those initially treated with TXA (n = 7) most commonly received nasal tampons (3 patients), while those initially treated with oxymetazoline (n = 15) most frequently received nasal tampons (12 patients), with fewer receiving packing, silver nitrate, or pressure.

Adverse Events

No serious adverse events were detected during the study.

Study Author Conclusions The topical application of intravenous TXA is more effective than topical oxymetazoline for achieving hemostasis in anterior epistaxis. This can prevent the need for more invasive treatments, reduce patient discomfort, and decrease emergency department throughput time.
Critique

The study's small sample size may limit the generalizability of the results. The lack of blinding due to the mode of drug administration could introduce bias. Additionally, the study did not account for the severity of epistaxis or the effects of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications, which could affect outcomes. Further research with larger, more diverse populations is needed to confirm these findings.

References:

Whitworth K, Johnson J, Wisniewski S, Schrader M. Comparative Effectiveness of Topically Administered Tranexamic Acid Versus Topical Oxymetazoline Spray for Achieving Hemostasis in Epistaxis [published correction appears in J Emerg Med. 2020 Dec;59(6):989. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2020.09.050.]. J Emerg Med. 2020;58(2):211-216. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.11.038

 

The Use of Tranexamic Acid to Reduce the Need for Nasal Packing in Epistaxis (NoPAC): Randomized Controlled Trial

Design

Double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized controlled trial 

N=496

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of topical intranasal tranexamic acid in adult patients presenting to the ED with persistent epistaxis, and whether it reduces the need for anterior nasal packing

Study Groups

Tranexamic (TXA) (n= 254)

Placebo (n= 242)

Inclusion Criteria

Age 18 or over; presenting to the emergency department (ED) with spontaneous, atraumatic epistaxis, unresolved with simple first aid, and standard initial therapy

Exclusion Criteria

Known hemophilia, epistaxis caused by trauma, known nasopharyngeal, nasal cavity or paranasal malignancy, and allergy to tranexamic acid.

Methods

Patients with spontaneous epistaxis were separated into tranexamic acid or placebo group. Before the patients assigned into a group, first providers try to stop the bleeding by squeezing the soft part of the nose, applying ice to the bridge of the nose, or both, if the bleeding does not stop, then the patient will be assigned into one of the two groups.

After randomization, patients were given the treatment contained within the next sequentially numbered pack. The packs contained a sealed vial of the trial solution (tranexamic acid or matched placebo) and follow-up call made on day 7 after discharge from the ED. 

Duration

From May 5, 2017, to March 31, 2019

Outcome Measures

Primary: subsequent need for anterior nasal packing in the ED

Secondary: need for hospital admission, blood transfusion, further treatment for epistaxis during the index ED attendance

Baseline Characteristics

 

Placebo  (N=242) 

TXA (N= 254)

 

Age, years Mean (SD)

 72.3 (13.9)  70.1 (15.6)  

Female

 41.3 % 49.6 %  
Anticoagulant medication  166 (68.6)

155 (61)

 
Hypertension  149 (61.6%)

153 (60.2%)

 
Any bleeding disorder  8 (3.3%)

5 (2.0%)

 
Alcoholic Liver disease  1 (0.4%)

2 (0.8%) 

 
Thromboembolic disease  16 (6.6%)

26 (10.2%) 

 

 

Results

Outcome 

Placebo 

TXA

Odds Ratio (95% CI)

ED epistaxis treatment  147 (60.7%) 157 (61.8%)

1.05 (0.73 to 1.52)

Epistaxis treatment 

174 (69.0%) 184 (72.4%) 1.04 (0.70 to 1.56) 

Blood transfusion 

6 (2.5%) 7 (2.8%) 1.11 (0.37 to 3.37)

Recurrent epistaxis 

39 (16.1%) 49 (19.4%) 1.26 (0.79 to 2.00) 
 

Adverse Events

Common Adverse Events: Nausea and vomiting 

Serious Adverse Events: feeling faint, sensation in the nostril, headache

Percentage that Discontinued due to Adverse Events: 0

Study Author Conclusions

Patients presenting to the ED with atraumatic epistaxis that is uncontrolled with simple first-aid measures and topical vasoconstrictor, topical tranexamic acid applied in the bleeding nostril on a cotton wool dental roll is no more effective than placebo at controlling bleeding and reducing the need for anterior nasal packing

InpharmD Researcher Critique

This study was double-blinded, which helped to minimize the bias. One of the strengths of this study was the sample size, which was large for this certain group of patients. 



References:

Reuben A, Appelboam A, Stevens KN, et al. The Use of Tranexamic Acid to Reduce the Need for Nasal Packing in Epistaxis (NoPAC): Randomized Controlled Trial [published online ahead of print, 2021 Feb 18]. Ann Emerg Med. 2021;S0196-0644(20)31461-X. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2020.12.013Reuben A, Appelboam A, Stevens KN, et al. The Use of Tranexamic Acid to Reduce the Need for Nasal Packing in Epistaxis (NoPAC): Randomized Controlled Trial [published online ahead of print, 2021 Feb 18]. Ann Emerg Med. 2021;S0196-0644(20)31461-X. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2020.12.013

 

Topical Tranexamic Acid Compared With Anterior Nasal Packing for Treatment of Epistaxis in Patients Taking Antiplatelet Drugs: Randomized Controlled Trial

Design

Randomized, parallel‐group clinical trial

N= 124

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of topical application of the injectable form of tranexamic acid (TXA) compared with anterior nasal packing (ANP) for the treatment of epistaxis in patients taking antiplatelet drugs (aspirin, clopidogrel, or both) who presented to the emergency department (ED)

Study Groups

TXA (n= 62)

ANP (n= 62)

Inclusion Criteria

Acute, new, or recurrent, onging anterir epistaxis, concurrent antiplatelet medications (aspirin, clopidogrel, or both)

Exclusion Criteria

Traumatic epistaxis, concurrent anticoagulant, inherited bleeding or platelet disorders, INR> 1.5, visible bleeding vessel, renal disease

Methods

The trial was unblinded due to differences in the number of pledgets used in each treatment group as well as differences in consistency, color, and smell of each medicaiton. 

Treatment with TXA consisted of soaking a 15 cm cotton pledget with the injectable form of TXA (500 mg in 5 mL) and inserting into the affected nostril. The pledget was removed after a physician or resident deemed the bleeding to have stopped. It treatment failed, then ANP and cauterization was considered. 

Treatment with ANP consisted of soaking a 15 cm pledget with epinephrine (1:100,000) and lidocaine (2%) into the affected nostril and left in place for 10 minutes. Afterwards, ANP was performed with sevrel pledgets covered with tetracycline ointment and left in place for 3 days. If treatment failed, then cauterization was considered. 

Duration

October 2015 to April 2016.

Outcome Measures

Primary outcome: bleeding stopped at 10 minutes

Secondary outcome: rebleeding rate at 24 hours and 1 week, ED discharge within 2 hours, patient satisfaction 

Baseline Characteristics

 

Tranexamic Acid

(n = 62)

Anterior Nasal Packing

(n = 62)

   

Age, years

60.7 ± 12.2 58.5 ± 16.1    

Male

32 (52%) 37 (60%)    

PLTs ×109/L

302 ± 80 298 ± 83    

PT, seconds

12.6 ± 0.9 12.5 ± 1.1    

INR

1.07 ± 0.10 1.05 ± 0.08    

PTT, seconds

32.7 ± 4.6 31.5 ± 3.8    

History of epistaxis

13 (21%) 33 (53%)    

Aspirin use 

51 (82%) 50 (81%)    

PLT= platelets; PT= prothrombin time; INR= international normalized ration; PTT= partial thromboplastin time 

Results

Endpoint

Tranexamic Acid

(n = 62)

Anterior Nasal Packing

(n = 62)

Percent difference

(95% CI)

p-Value

Bleeding stop time ≤10 minutes

45 (73%) 18 (29%) 44 (26 to 57)

<0.001

Rebleeding

24 hours

1 week

 

3 (5%)

3 (5%)

 

6 (10%)

13 (21%)

 

–5 (–15 to 5)

–16 (–28 to –4)

 

0.299

0.007

ED discharge within 2 hours

60 (97%)

8 (13%)

84 (71 to 91)

<0.001

Patient satisfaction (IQR)*

9 (8 - 9.25)

4 (3 - 5)

-

<0.001

CI= confidence interval; ED= emergency department; IQR= interquartile range 

*= Patient satisfaction based on a 0-10 numeric scale, with 10 being the most satisfied.

Adverse Events

Common Adverse Events: nausea/vomiting or treatment intolerance (6 [10%] vs 3 [5%])

Serious Adverse Events: N/A

Percentage that Discontinued due to Adverse Events: N/A

Study Author Conclusions

Epistaxis treatment with topical application of TXA resulted in faster bleeding cessation, less rebleeding at 1 week, shorter ED LOS, and higher patient satisfaction compared with ANP.

InpharmD Researcher Critique

The study took place in Iran. Patients and physicians were also unblinded due to the nature of the protocol and thus introduces some bias. The study also only looked at anterior epistaxis and did not compare against other conventional means of treatment, such as nasal sponges. 



References:

Zahed R, Mousavi Jazayeri MH, Naderi A, Naderpour Z, Saeedi M. Topical Tranexamic Acid Compared With Anterior Nasal Packing for Treatment of Epistaxis in Patients Taking Antiplatelet Drugs: Randomized Controlled Trial. Acad Emerg Med. 2018;25(3):261-266. doi:10.1111/acem.13345

 

A new and rapid method for epistaxis treatment using injectable form of tranexamic acid topically: a randomized controlled trial

Design

Randomized, single-center, parallel group clinical trial 

N= 216

Objective

To determine the efficacy of the topical application of the injectable form of tranexamic acid in the treatment of epistaxis

Study Groups

Tranexamic acid (n= 107)

Anterior nasal packing (n=109) 

Inclusion Criteria

Idiopathic etiology and recurrent anterior epistaxis

Exclusion Criteria

Epistaxis following major trauma, posterior epistaxis, known history of bleeding disorder such as thrombocytopenia, hemophilia, and platelet disorders. INR ratio greater than 1.5, shock, and visible bleeding vessel

Methods

In the tranexamic acid group, a 15-cm piece of cotton pledget soaked in injectable form of tranexamic acid (500 mg in 5 mL) was inserted in the nostril of the bleeding side. It was removed after bleeding arrest was determined by examining the blood-soaked pledgets and the oropharynx. In the anterior nasal packing group, usual shrinkage, with a cotton pledget soaked in epinephrine (1:100000) + lidocaine (2%) for 10 minutes, and packing, with several cotton pledgets covered with tetracycline, were performed in the nostril of the bleeding side. Nasal packing was removed after 3 days.

Duration

7 days

Outcome Measures

Primary: Bleeding stop time ≤10 min

Secondary: discharge time ≤2 hours, complications in the ED, rebleeding in the first 24 h, and rebleeding in 1 wk

Baseline Characteristics

 

Anterior nausal packing (n=109)

Tranexamic acid (n=107) 

p-value   

Age, years

 54 ± 15.5 50.4 ± 19 0.129  

Female

47.7% 37.4% 0.125  

PLT X 10^3/μL

293 ± 76 294 ± 80 0.935  

PT, s

12.4 ± 1.4 12.4 ± 0.7 0.959  

INR

1.08 ± 0.16 1.08 ± 0.16 0.962  

PTT9, s

33.1 ± 3.6 33 ± 2.6 0.838  

History of epistaxis

13.6% 58.1% 0.001  

 

Results

Endpoint

Anterior nausal packing

Tranexamic acid

Odds ratio (95% confidence interval

p-value 

Bleeding stop time ≤ 10 min (%)

 31.2 71 2.28 (1.68-3.09) <0.001

Discharge time ≤ 2 h (%)

 6.4 95.3 14.8 (7.2-30.4) <0.001

Complications in the ED (%)

11 4.7 0.42 (0.16-1.16) 0.128

Rebleeding in the first 24 h (%)

12.8 4.7 0.36 (0.14-0.98) 0.034

Rebleeding in 1 wk (%)

11 2.8 0.26 (0.07-0.88)  0.018
 

Adverse Events

Common Adverse Events: nausea (5% vs 9%), vomiting, intolerance

Serious Adverse Events: Rebleeding in the first 24 h, and in 1 week 

Study Author Conclusions

Using injectable form of tranexamic acid topically could provide a better treatment for idiopathic anterior epistaxis compared with usual anterior nasal packing

InpharmD Researcher Critique

This study was not blinded, which leads to bias. 



References:

Zahed R, Moharamzadeh P, Alizadeharasi S, Ghasemi A, Saeedi M. A new and rapid method for epistaxis treatment using injectable form of tranexamic acid topically: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Emerg Med. 2013;31(9):1389-1392. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2013.06.043

 

Evaluating Effectiveness of Nasal Compression with Tranexamic Acid compared with Simple Nasal Compression and Merocel Packing: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Design

Single-center, prospective, randomized controlled study

N= 135

Objective

To compare the effectiveness of 3 treatment protocols to stop anterior epistaxis: classic compression, nasal packing, and local application of tranexamic acid and to determine the frequency of rebleeding after each of these protocols

Study Groups

Compression with saline solution (n= 45)

Compression with tranexamic acid (TXA) (n= 45)

Nasal packing (n= 45)

Inclusion Criteria

>18 years old, present to ED with active, spontaneous anterior epistaxis

Exclusion Criteria

Use of current anticoagulation therapy, presence of hemodynamic instability, arterial pressure <90/60 mmHg, tachycardia >100 beats/min, altered mental status, traumatic epistaxis, resolved epistaxis on admission, known bleeding disorder

Methods

The study was conducted in the ED of a training and research hospital. Patients with spontaneous anterior epistaxis were placed into three treatment options: tranexamic acid with compression but without nasal packing, nasal packing (Merocel), and simple nasal external compression. All patients were asked to blow their nose with tap water for an examination with a nasal speculum to visualize the actively bleeding vessel. Before intervention, all patients were asked to perform self-compression.

One treatment group received nasal compression with tranexamic acid 500 mg diluted in 5 mL of 0.9% normal saline solution. The solution was sprayed with an atomizer into both nostrils of each patient. External nasal compression was performed after for 15 minutes.

The second group received compression with 5 mL saline solution of 0.9% nasal saline without tranexamic acid. External nasal compression was performed after for 15 minutes.

The third group received nasal packing with Merocel and 2% lidocaine for 24 hours.

All patients were examined 15 minutes after to check if bleeding stopped. Patients were reexamined again in the hospital after 24 hours of rebleeding.

Duration

Study duration: May to August 2018

Intervention duration: 24 hours

Outcome Measures

Primary: Success rates of stopping anterior epistaxis bleeding within 15 minutes

Secondary: Rebleeding rate within 24 hours

Baseline Characteristics

 

Compression with saline solution (n= 45)

Compression with TXA (n= 45)

 

Nasal packing (n= 45)

Differences in TXA and saline solution (95% CI)

Difference in Packing and Saline Solution (95% CI) Differences in Nasal Packing and TSA (95% CI)

Median age, years (IQR)

 58 (47, 68)  58 (48, 73)  63 (48, 73) 15.7 (–4.7 to 34) 15.7 (–4.7 to 34) 0 (–19.7 to 19.7)

Female, n

 28 (62.3%)  21 (46.6%)  21 (46.6%) 0 (–7.65 to 7.65) 5 (–12.5 to 2.65) 5 (–13.5 to 3.5)

Comorbidities, n

Hypertension

Coronary Artery disease

Diabetes

COPD

Congestive heart failure

Other

 

21 (46.6%)

 1 (2.2%)

 5 (11.1%)

 2 (4.4%)

 1 (2.2%)

 2 (4.4%)

 

24 (53.4%)

 7 (15.5%)

 7 (15.5%)

 1 (2.2%)

 1 (2.2%)

5 (11.1%)

 

21 (46.6%)

3 (6.6%)

7 (15.5%)

1 (2.2%)

1 (2.2%)

3 (6.6%)

 

6.8 (–13.3 to 26.2)

13.3 (1.1 to 26.6)

4.4 (–10.2 to 19)

2.2 (–7.6 to 12.7)

0 (–9.5 to 9.5)

6.7 (–5.4 to 19.4)

 

0 (–19.7 to 19.7)

4.4 (–5.8 to 15.7)

4.4 (–10.2 to 19)

2.2 (–7.6 to 12.7)

0 (–9.5 to 9.5)

2.2 (–9 to 13.8)

 

6.8 (–13.3 to 26.2)

9 (–4 to 22.9)

0 (–15.3 to 15.3)

0 (–9.5 to 9.5)

0 (–9.5 to 9.5)

4.5 (–8.3 to 17.6)

Results

Endpoint

Compression with saline solution (n= 45)

Compression with tranexamic acid (n= 45)

 

Nasal packing (n= 45)

Differences in TXA and saline solution (95% CI)

Difference in Packing and Saline Solution (95% CI)

Differences in Nasal Packing and TSA (95% CI)

Stop bleeding within 15 min, n

 32 (71.1%)  41 (91.1%)  42 (93.3%) 20 (3.6 to 35.4) 22.2 (6.3 to 37.3) 2.2 (–10.2 to 14.8)

Rescue treatment, n

 13 (28.9%)  4 (8.9%)  3 (6.7%) 20 (3.6 to 35.4) 22.2 (6.3 to 37.3) 2.2 (–10.2 to 14.8)

No bleeding at 24h, n

27 (60%) 39 (86.7%) 33 (73.3%) 26.7 (8.4 to 42.8) 14 (–5 to 31.9) 13.4 (–3.3 to 29.4)

Adverse Events

Common Adverse Events: N/A

Serious Adverse Events: N/A

Percentage that Discontinued due to Adverse Events: N/A

Study Author Conclusions

Applying external compression after administering tranexamic acid through the nostrils by atomizer stops bleeding as effectively as anterior nasal packing using Merocel. In addition, the tranexamic acid approach is superior to Merocel in terms of decreasing rebleeding rates.

InpharmD Researcher Critique

The study did not classify nosebleeds based on the severity of bleeding since there is no universal severity scale for spontaneous anterior epistaxis. The study also only looked at using anterior nasal tampons and classic compression method for managing anterior epistaxis. Merocel was the only commercial packing material used in this study, other types of material may have different success rates.



References:

Akkan S, Çorbacıoğlu ŞK, Aytar H, Emektar E, Dağar S, Çevik Y. Evaluating Effectiveness of Nasal Compression With Tranexamic Acid Compared With Simple Nasal Compression and Merocel Packing: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2019;74(1):72-78. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2019.03.030