Retrospective Audit of a Factor VIII Continuous Infusion Protocol to Examine Inhibitor Formation, Complications and Product Use.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Continuous infusion (CI) of factor concentrates has been suggested to decrease both the risk of bleeding and cost in the treatment of bleeding disorders. However, concerns have been raised with regards to the stability and sterility of products administered by CI and the risk of local thrombophlebitis. Most recently, there has been a concern about a potential association between the use of CI and the development of an inhibitor in mild hemophilia. A retrospective chart review was conducted to determine the effectiveness, safety, product use and risk of inhibitor formation of a continuous infusion protocol in the management of hemophilia A. Currently 248 patients are registered with the Provincial Hemophilia Program for Newfoundland and Labrador. These patients include 104 with mild hemophilia A, 3 with moderate hemophilia A and 5 with severe hemophilia A. The charts of twelve hemophilia A patients who received factor VIII (FVIII) by CI a total of 18 times between April 1998 and September 2003 were reviewed. All patients were affected by hemophilia A; 8 patients were diagnosed as mild, 1 as moderate and 3 as severe. The mean age of the cohort was 36.1 years and the patients’ ages ranged from 4 months to 75 years. Continuous infusion was used as treatment for severe bleeds in 12 cases and as prophylaxis for surgical procedures in 6 cases. All patients received recombinant FVIII. Recommended devices such as a syringe pump and mini-pump were unavailable therefore all infusions were carried out by diluting the reconstituted concentrate in saline and delivering via IV infusion. The CI protocol followed required a bolus of 50 U/kg of FVIII followed by CI at an initial rate of 4 U/kg/hr. Based on daily FVIII levels, this maintenance dose could be adjusted, with an initial targeted FVIII level of 1.0 U/L. The maximum initial infusion rate was 6.7 U/kg/hr and the minimum was 3.2 U/kg/hr (mean 4.3 U/kg/hr). The infusion rate was reduced in 8 cases to a minimum of 1.2 U/kg/hr. Adequate FVIII levels were maintained after the reduction of the infusion rate in all cases. The mean low and high FVIII levels were 0.79 U/L and 1.23 U/L, respectively (range 0.05 to 1.82 U/L). Excluding the patient who developed an inhibitor, the FVIII level remained above the minimum acceptable level of 0.3 U/L for the duration of CI in all but one case (low 0.29 U/L). Patients required an average dose of 53,163 units (range 2651–299,137 units) of factor concentrate delivered by continuous infusion over a mean period of 8.1 days (range 2–21 days). FVIII infusion was well tolerated in all cases; there were no documented cases of significant bleeding, adverse reactions, thrombophlebitis or infection. One patient was documented to have a minor bleed from an NG tube despite adequate FVIII levels throughout the period of infusion. One patient with mild hemophilia developed a low titer inhibitor (0.8 BU) approximately 2 years after receiving FVIII by continuous infusion for 8 days. Another mild hemophilia patient was discovered to have a low titer inhibitor (1.3 BU) on the eighth day after the third infusion had begun. It is possible that CI contributed to the development of an inhibitor in this patient. CI was not found to significantly reduce product use. More rapid downward adjustment of infusion rates in response to high FVIII levels might improve product utilization.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».