Rinsing Dialyzers without Heparin in Hemodialysis (HD) with Low-Molecular Weight Heparin (LMWH)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Saline plus unfractionated heparin (UFH) is routinely used for priming dializers before HD start. The aim of this study is to assess if heparin is necessary in pre-rinsing procedure of extracorporeal systems, anticoagulated with LMWH. We carried-out a prospective study in 14 stable HD patients, aged 58.5 ± 3.6 years old. All patients were treated by standard bicarbonate HD, 3 sessions × week, HD time 220 ± 12 min, Qb 276 ± 21 ml/min, low-flux dialyzers (polisulfone 5, cellulose diacetate 9). Clotting was prevented with a single bemiparin (LMWH) bolus 2900 ± 140 IU. Three rinsing protocols were applied in three consecutive weeks: 1st week- Saline 1000 ml + LMWH 2500 IU. 2d week- Saline 1000 ml + UFH 5000 IU. 3th week- Saline 1000 ml. Anti-Xa activity (IU/ml) was measured at each HD (at 10 min/end). Clotting events and post-HD AVF hemostasis were recorded in a semiquantitative scale. No significant statistical differences (Anova) were found in anti-Xa heparin activity (IU/ml) among the three rinsing protocols tested: 10 min (NS) End (NS) 1st week 0.81 ± 0.16 0.55 ± 0.43 2nd week 0.76 ± 0.21 0.58 ± 0.16 3th week 0.86 ± 0.14 0.64 ± 0.16 No differences were observed in drip chamber or dialyzer appearance after HD. Massive clotting was not recorded. No important bleeding was observed at stick needle sites. In conclusion, HD performed with LMWH no needs heparin in rinsing solution. The procedure is effective and safe.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".