The ‘ART’ of thrombosis: a review of arterial and venous thrombosis in assisted reproductive technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of assisted reproductive technology (ART) has increased tremendously in the past three decades. During the process of ART, supraphysiological estradiol levels with exogenous hormone administration can result. One major complication of this intervention, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), is associated with both arterial and venous thromboembolic complications. RECENT FINDINGS: There are an increasing number of both arterial and venous thromboembolic cases reported in the literature. In total, there are 96 cases of thromboses reported in the literature; a third of these cases were reported within the past 2 years. The collective findings from these reported cases were consistent: the timing of arterial and venous events differed, arterial events usually occur concurrently with the onset of OHSS, whereas venous events occur several weeks later after the clinical resolution of OHSS; arterial thromboses are predominantly cerebrovascular accidents, whereas venous events are mostly reported in unusual sites such as the upper extremities. SUMMARY: In spite of the frequency of reported cases, there is little in the literature to guide thromboprophylaxis. On the basis of the observations, thromboprophylaxis should be considered for patients who develop moderate-to-severe OHSS for an extended period of 1-2 months beyond the resolution of clinical OHSS, and also be considered for patients with known inherited or acquired thrombophilia, while undergoing ART. Future studies should focus on defining the frequency and risk factors associated with women who develop these complications and more closely examine the resultant effects in the coagulation cascade during hormonal manipulation in women undergoing ART.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".