Evaluation of coagulation markers in the plasma of healthy cats and cats with asymptomatic hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thrombosis and arterial thromboembolism are frequent complications of feline cardiomyopathy, especially when associated with left atrial enlargement. Markers of activated coagulation may be used to evaluate the coagulation status of cats with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) in relation to left atrial size. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare plasma concentrations of thrombin-antithrombin complex (TAT), D-dimer, and fibrin degradation products (FDP) between clinically healthy cats and cats with HCM. Prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), and antithrombin activity were also compared and the association between left atrial (LA) size and coagulation results in cats with HCM was evaluated. METHODS: Blood samples from 19 clinically healthy cats and 20 cats with HCM were obtained. All cats with HCM were asymptomatic and had no signs of heart failure. LA diameter and LA to proximal aortic (Ao) diameter ratio (LA:Ao) were determined by echocardiography. RESULTS: Reference intervals for D-dimer and TAT concentrations in plasma of healthy cats were established as 0.09-0.32 microg/mL and 2.0-20.0 microg/L, respectively. TAT, D-dimer, and FDP concentrations were increased in 5, 3, and 2 cats with HCM, respectively. TAT and D-dimer concentrations, and PT and aPTT were not significantly different between groups. Antithrombin activity was significantly decreased in cats with HCM (P=.03) despite marked range overlap. LA and LA:Ao were not correlated with coagulation results. CONCLUSIONS: Laboratory evidence of hypercoagulability was found in 45% of cats with HCM. Left atrial size was not associated with laboratory evidence of hypercoagulability. Association between coagulation markers and risk of thrombosis has yet to be evaluated in cats with HCM.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".