MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061050027 · doi:10.1592/phco.30.11.1150

Trisodium Citrate: An Alternative to Unfractionated Heparin for Hemodialysis Catheter Dwells

2010· review· en· W2061050027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dwayne A. Pierce, Michael V. Rocco

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug Therapy · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrisodium citrateHeparinSodium citrateMedicineHemodialysisAnticoagulantCatheterDialysisHemodialysis CatheterSurgeryPharmacologyChemistryBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of tunneled hemodialysis catheters, or permcaths, either for temporary dialysis access before arteriovenous fistula or arteriovenous graft maturation or for long-term dialysis access, is associated with increased risk of catheter clotting and infection. Catheter locking solutions are routinely used to maintain patency in these catheters between dialysis sessions. Unfractionated heparin has traditionally been used for this purpose; however, trisodium citrate (also known as sodium citrate or citrate) has recently been shown to be an efficacious alternative to heparin as a locking solution. Citrate exerts both its anticoagulant and antimicrobial properties by chelating calcium to disrupt the normal coagulation pathway and by interfering with the formation of biofilm and the bacterial cell wall. Citrate is at least equivalent to heparin as an anticoagulant and antimicrobial agent for catheter locking, and in some clinical studies citrate was shown to be superior. Two different concentrations of sodium citrate were previously available; however, concerns of safety led to the removal of citrate 46.7% from the United States and Canadian markets in 2000, leaving only citrate 4% available for use as a catheter locking solution. The systemic hypocalcemic effects that were reported with citrate 46.7% have not been observed with citrate 4% in clinical trials, and the risk of systemic anticoagulation and bleeding was shown to be lower than that with unfractionated heparin. In addition, most comparative cost data indicate that citrate is a more cost-effective alternative than heparin; however, costs can vary by institution. Despite inconclusive evidence of clinical superiority, citrate 4% appears to provide a safe and at least equivocal alternative to heparin as a catheter locking agent.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.099
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacotherapy The Journal of Human Pharmacology and Drug TherapySame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207