A novel hemostatic agent: the potential role of recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa) in anesthetic practice.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To review the role of recombinant factor VIIa in anesthetic practice. SOURCE: A review of the published literature. MAIN FINDINGS: The mechanism of action of rFVIIa suggests enhancement of hemostasis limited to the site of injury without systemic activation of the coagulation cascade. In addition to its indication for use in patients with hemophilia, use of rFVIIa for treatment of uncontrolled massive hemorrhage in various peroperative settings appears to be rational, safe, and effective. Published results suggest that in trauma patients rFVIIa may play a role as an adjunctive hemostatic measure in addition to surgical hemostatic techniques There is preliminary evidence that hemorrhagic complications (eg. epistaxis, vaginal bleeding) associated with profound thrombocytopenia can be reversed with rFVIIa even at platelet counts below 10,000 per microL. Various case reports outlining the successful treatment with recombinant factor VIIa of patents experiencing intractable bleeding after valve replacement surgery, and with severe hemorrhage during therapy with left ventricular assist device, indicate the potential therapeutic efficacy of this agent in cardiac surgical procedures. Additionally, rFVIIa has been used successfully for treatment of massive postoperative bleeding following general surgery. CONCLUSIONS: rFVIIa is a novel hemostatic agent that shows promise in non-hemophiliac patents of a significant therapeutic role in variety of coagulopathic and hemorrhagic conditions in clinical situations ranging from thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation and transfusion-related coagulopathy, as well as in patients experiencing massive blood loss undergoing orthotopic liver transplantation, cardiac, orthopedic and genitourinary surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".