Whole blood heparin concentrations do not correlate with plasma antifactor Xa heparin concentrations in pediatric patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to test the validity of whole blood heparin concentration (WHBC) measurements using an on-site protamine titration assay with the Hepcon instrument (Medtronic Blood Management, Parker, CO, USA) in pediatric patients less than 1 year old undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The validity of the Hepcon measurements was examined via a test of correlation with the gold standard plasma antifactor Xa activity (anti-Xa) assay. Fifty-one patients (23 females and 28 males) under 1 year old (mean age 5.3 months) were studied prospectively. Blood samples were taken at 5 min into CPB and at the end of CPB for the WBHC, plasma anti-Xa activity, and hematocrit (Hct). The WBHC was converted to plasma heparin level using a formula taking into account the collection of blood into citrate solution and the effect of the citrate on the hematocrit. While a nonparametric statistical analysis revealed that the mean corrected values from the Hepcon instrument were not significantly different from the mean anti-Xa values (p = 0.070 at 5 min on CPB, p = 0.518 at the end of CPB), there was no significant correlation between these values at either 5 min into CPB (r = 0.113, p = 0.429) or at the end of CPB (r = -0.247, p = 0.080). The lack of correlation between the two assays may be related to the extreme hemodilution observed during CPB in small children, which leads to very low concentrations of coagulation proteins. Due to this discrepancy, whole blood heparin monitors should be further evaluated in children undergoing CPB.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".