Management of acute haemarthrosis in haemophilia A without inhibitors: literature review, European survey and recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute haemarthrosis is a frequent type of bleeding in individuals with haemophilia. Delayed and/or inadequate treatment can trigger a series of pathological changes within the joint, leading to a painful and disabling arthropathy. The early management of intra-articular bleeding has the potential to prevent chronic joint disease and may include a combination of factor replacement, rest, ice, rehabilitation and, in certain cases, joint aspiration. Little data are, however, available regarding the optimal management of acute haemarthrosis, especially with respect to replacement therapy and the use of adjunctive therapies (aspiration, avoidance of weight bearing and immobilization, as well as the use of anti-inflammatory medication and embolization). To provide more insight into the management of acute haemarthrosis in patients with haemophilia, a literature review was conducted. Concomitantly, current management was surveyed in 26 European haemophilia comprehensive care centres representing 15 different countries. The review highlights the need for future robust studies to better define the appropriate replacement therapy and the role of adjunctive therapies such as aspiration. The survey reveals much heterogeneity in the management of acute haemarthrosis across the EU. Within the constraints discussed, treatment recommendations are presented that reflect the literature, current practice and the clinical experience of the European Haemophilia Therapy Standardisation Board (EHTSB).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".