MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 3049: Clinical Outcomes after Urgent Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients on Clopidogrel: Are the Risks Tangible or Anecdotal?

2007· article· en· W103182114 on OpenAlexaff
Steve K. Singh, Nachum Nesher, Nimesh D. Desai, Elsyed Elmistekawy, Fuad Moussa, George T. Christakis, Bernard S. Goldman, Gideon Cohen, Claude Laflamme, Jeannie Callum, Stephen E. Fremes

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClopidogrelStroke (engine)CardiologyClinical endpointCardiopulmonary bypassInternal medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryMyocardial infarctionRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE : Clopidogrel is indicated in acute and chronic coronary syndromes and often administered prior to angiography. These patients are often sent subsequently for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, where potential increase in bleeding risk must be balanced with risk of ongoing ischemia if CABG delayed. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that patients undergoing urgent CABG who received clopidogrel, versus those who did not, have worse bleeding outcomes and early mortality. METHODS : We reviewed 451 consecutive patients (04/2005–12/2006) who underwent urgent CABG at our institution: 262 never received clopidogrel pre-CABG, 189 received clopidogrel <5 days prior. The latter all received intraoperative antifibrinolytics. The primary endpoint was in-hospital death, massive transfusion (>10U PRBC) or massive blood loss (>2L chest-tube loss/24 hrs). RESULTS : Patient characteristics were comparable between groups. Prior MI (71% vs 46%), NYHA class 3– 4 (94% vs 81%) and prior PCI (22% vs 13%) were higher in the clopidogrel group (p<0.05). Cross-clamp time was statistically higher in the clopidogrel group (97±30 vs 90±28 min, p=0.02); cardiopulmonary bypass and total operative times were similar. There was no difference in the primary endpoint of in-hospital death or massive bleeding indices (clopidogrel: 7% vs no clopidogrel: 6%, p=0.9). Death, bleeding indices, renal failure, post-op MI and stroke, were no different even after adjusting for the date of stopping clopidogrel pre-CABG. Chart audit showed bleeding as a significant contributor to cause of deaths, was no different in either cohort. After multivariable regression analysis, clopidogrel or the duration it was stopped pre-CABG, were not predictors of outcomes (death, MI, stroke or chest reopening for bleeding). Significant independent predictors of the primary endpoint included pre-op renal dysfunction, peripheral vascular disease and pre-op hemoglobin. CONCLUSION : Clopidogrel, or the time it was stopped prior to CABG, was not a risk factor for in-hospital death, massive bleeding, or other poor early outcomes in patients undergoing urgent CABG. Practice measures such as the use of antifibrinolytic agents may ameliorate the adverse effects of clopidogrel.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207