Perioperative Management of Patients Receiving Anticoagulant or Antiplatelet Therapy: A Clinician-Oriented and Practical Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The management of patients who are receiving warfarin, aspirin, clopidogrel, or combinations of these drugs and require their interruption because of an elective surgical or other invasive procedure is a common and sometimes challenging clinical problem. For the practicing clinician, there are 2 key issues for perioperative anticoagulant management: 1) having an approach to stratify patients according to their risk for thromboembolism when warfarin or antiplatelet drug therapy is interrupted, and also having an approach to stratify patients according to the risk of bleeding associated with the surgery or procedure; and 2) determining which patients may require bridging anticoagulation and, if required, how to administer bridging, typically with a low-molecular-weight heparin, before and after surgery in a manner that minimizes the risk for bleeding. The overall goal is to minimize patients' risk for thromboembolism and bleeding throughout the perioperative period. The objective of this article is to provide an evidence-based but practical approach relating to these 2 key issues in a manner than can be applied to everyday clinical practice.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".