MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025265586 · doi:10.1186/cc5526

Fibrinolysis during cardiopulmonary bypass detected with thromboelastography

2007· article· en· W2025265586 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Roman Hájek, Jana Růžičková, Ivo Fluger, Petr Němec, Vilém Bruk

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchBayer Canada
KeywordsThromboelastographyMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassFibrinolysisThrombelastographyThromboelastometryIntensive care medicineCardiologyEmergency medicineInternal medicineAnesthesiaCoagulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fibrinolysis is a common haemostatic abnormality during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Thromboelastography (TEG) is a good method to detect both types of fibrinolysis. Four hundred and ninety-nine patients during mild hypothermic CPB and elective surgery were monitored with TEG (first – after the induction, second – after rewarming, third and fourth – at the end of surgery native and heparinase). No prophylactic antifibrinolytics were used. The data of the study group were compared with a control group of 475 patients monitored only with laboratory tests (fibrin degradation products (FDP) and D-dimers). Peroperative and 24 hour postoperative bleeding, number of transfusions, aprotinin therapy and reexploration were recorded. Correlations between the presence of fibrinolysis and blood loss and transfusion therapy and between aprotinin administration and blood loss and number of transfusions were evaluated. The frequency of fibrinolysis measured with TEG: before surgery – primary 3.2%/secondary 3.4%; during CPB – 18.8%/0.6%; after surgery – 7%/1.4% (native), 5.6%/0.6% (heparinase). Positivity of fibrinolysis detected with laboratory tests was 100%. The TEG parameter of fibrinolysis (LY30) was significantly increased during CPB. The frequency of aprotinin administration was 12% TEG, 10.7% control. No correlation between positivity of fibrinolysis and peroperative/postoperative blood loss and red blood cells (RBC) and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) transfusions were recorded. No correlation between aprotinin administration and peroperative/postoperative blood loss and RBC transfusion were recorded. Positive correlation between aprotinin administration and FFP transfusion were recorded Fibrinolysis was usually not associated with serious bleeding. There was no positive effect of aprotinin to reduce bleeding or transfusion therapy. FDP and D-dimers are not useful to detect fibrinolysis in cardiac 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, ResuscitationFrench-language works237,207