MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2560521267 · doi:10.1182/blood.v118.21.1159.1159

HIT Antibody Seropositivity and Thromboembolic Events After Cardiac Surgery

2011· article· en· W2560521267 sur OpenAlexaff
Thomas L. Ortel, Ian J. Welsby, David F. Kong, John A. Heit, Elizabeth F. Krakow, Nicole L. Whitlatch, Gowthami M. Arepally, Grace M. Lee, Shahar Bar-Yosef, Eliot C. Williams

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis
Établissements canadiensUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineHeparin-induced thrombocytopeniaPlatelet factor 4ThrombosisAdverse effectHeparinInternal medicineProspective cohort studySurgeryClinical endpointPlatelet activationPlateletClinical trial

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 1159 Background. Heparin induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an immune disorder where platelets are activated by antibodies to a complex of platelet factor 4 antigen and heparin (PF4/H), leading to thrombocytopenia (HIT) and, potentially, thrombosis (HITT). Documentation of anti-PF4/H antibodies in addition to the appropriate clinical findings is essential for making a diagnosis of HIT. In the post-cardiac bypass surgery setting, however, the frequency of elevated anti-PF4/H antibodies is high, whereas the frequency of clinical HIT or HITT is relatively uncommon. Several studies have shown that the presence of anti-PF4/H antibodies may be associated with an increased frequency of adverse outcomes, even in the absence of clinical HIT. The primary objective of this study was to determine the relationship between a positive PF4/H antibody in the postoperative setting with adverse thromboembolic events occurring up to 3 months after cardiac surgery. Methods. Patients undergoing cardiac surgery who were not going to be treated with chronic anticoagulation postoperatively were eligible for this multi-center prospective cohort study. Data were collected daily during hospitalization, and then at 30 and 90 days after surgery using a structured interview format with a standardized questionnaire that included all thrombotic as well as hemorrhagic events, platelet counts, and utilization of antithrombotics in the postoperative setting. The primary outcome variable was a composite endpoint comprising arterial and venous thrombotic events and other miscellaneous events compatible with HIT, as well as death attributable to an event compatible with HIT. Citrated plasma was collected at baseline, pre-discharge (∼4–5 days after surgery), and the 30 day follow-up visit, processed, and stored at −80°C for testing. Laboratory analyses included an anti-PF4/H antibody ELISA (GTI, Waukesha, WI) on all samples, a high-heparin confirmatory test on samples with an OD reading >0.40, and a serotonin release assay (SRA) on all postoperative samples with an OD reading >0.40. A sample size of 800 patients was estimated in order to detect a 3% difference in thromboembolic events assuming a 2 to 10-fold increase risk attributable to seropositivity. Chi-squared testing was used to test the relationship between the primary outcome and postoperative anti-PF4/H levels. Results. Informed consent was obtained from 1030 eligible patients between August 2006 and May 2009, and laboratory and follow-up data were analyzable for 1016 patients. Thirty-day antibody data were available for 888 patients, and fully complete laboratory and 90-day follow-up data were available for 815 patients. The average age was 62 ± 12 years, and 73% of participants were male. A total of 769 patients underwent coronary artery bypass grafting and 237 underwent valve repair or replacement. During the entire study period, there were 17 (1.7%) deaths, 46 thromboembolic events in 44 patients (4.3%), and 25 hemorrhagic events in 24 patients (2.4%). Using an OD cutoff of 0.40 for the ELISA, 339 patients (33.4%) were positive for anti-PF4/H antibodies at the time of discharge, and 630 patients (62%) were positive by day 30. There was no correlation between seropositivity for anti-PF4/H antibodies at the day of discharge or at day 30 and the primary outcome (p=0.47 and 0.73, respectively). Incorporating the high-heparin confirmatory step did not improve the relationship between positive antibody results and the primary outcome. Using a higher cut-off value for the anti-PF4/H antibody ELISA of 1.0 decreased the number of patients with positive results (96 patients at the time of discharge [9.4%] and 221 patients at the 30-day follow-up visit [21.8%]), but this did not improve the relationship between antibody positivity at the day of discharge or day 30 and the primary clinical endpoint, since most patients with the primary endpoint had an ELISA OD below 1.0 (75th percentile of 0.90; 90th percentile of 1.22). Similarly, using the SRA did not identify a relationship between assay results and outcome. Conclusions. The presence of anti-PF4/H antibodies in the postoperative setting following cardiac bypass surgery is not associated with an increased risk for thromboembolic complications. Positive anti-PF4/H results in this clinical setting should be interpreted with caution and only in the context of clinical suspicion for HIT. Disclosures: Ortel: Instrumentation Laboratory: Consultancy; Eisai: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Welsby:CSL Behring: Speaker; CSL Behring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NovoNordisk: Principal Investigator. Heit:Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Ortho-McNeil Janssen: Honoraria; Covidien: Honoraria.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,008

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,034
Tête enseignante GPT0,275
Écart entre enseignants0,241 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetHeparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia and Thrombosis→Travaux en français237 207→