Management of Anticoagulants before and after Endoscopy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The risk of procedure-related bleeding while taking anticoagulants needs to be weighed against the risk of thromboembolism from discontinuing these drugs. It is not necessary to adjust anticoagulation for low-risk procedures, such as upper endoscopy with biopsy, colonoscopy with biopsy or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with stent insertion (but without sphincterotomy). Procedures that incur a high risk of bleeding include polypectomy, endoscopic sphincterotomy, laser therapy, mucosal ablation and treatment of varices. For these procedures, warfarin should be discontinued four to five days beforehand. Depending on the risk of thromboembolism, that is based on the nature of the underlying condition, the patient may require vitamin K and/or fresh frozen plasma (to ensure that coagulation parameters are within the normal range) or heparin infusions (to ensure that some degree of anticoagulation is maintained). Low molecular weight heparin is an alternative to unfractionated heparin for select cases with a high risk of thromboembolism. Warfarin therapy may generally be resumed on the night of the procedure and may be supplemented by heparin in patients with a high risk of thromboembolism. It is not necessary to discontinue acetylsalicylic acid or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, when used in standard doses, for endoscopic procedures. There are insufficient data to make recommendations regarding newer antiplatelet drugs, such as ticlopidine or clopidogrel, but it is prudent to discontinue these medications seven to 10 days before a high-risk procedure.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it