Effect of clopidogrel on bleeding and transfusions after off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery: impact of discontinuation prior to surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The use of antiplatelet drugs to treat acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, acute coronary syndrome and secondary prevention following percutaneous coronary interventions is well accepted. However, it constitutes a serious risk of bleeding for patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG). We evaluated the effect of aspirin and clopidogrel (CPDG), both irreversible platelet aggregation inhibitors, on operative bleeding and determined the optimal timing for their discontinuation before surgery. METHOD: Between July 2001 and December 2004, we reviewed our experience with 453 patients undergoing off-pump CABG surgery (OPCAB) who received CPDG (n=101) or not (n=352) preoperatively, and compared the intraoperative and postoperative bleeding to determine risks factors associated with blood or platelet transfusions. RESULTS: Clopidogrel in OPCAB surgery is associated with higher intraoperative (702.24 ml vs 554.13 ml, p=0.03) and postoperative bleeding (864.93 ml vs 603.75 ml, p=0.03). The mean operative blood loss is higher in patients still on CPDG at the time of surgery compared to patients off CPDG at least 72 h before surgery (802 ml vs 554.13 ml, p<0.0001). Blood loss in the later subgroup of patients is comparable to the control group without CPDG (p=NS). Clopidogrel is associated with more platelet transfusions (OR=11.79, [1.48; 93.86]). CONCLUSION: Blood loss is higher in OPCAB patients receiving clopidogrel before surgery. However, discontinuation of clopidogrel three days (72 h) prior to the operation demonstrated a similar blood loss pattern compared to a control group. Clopidogrel is associated with more platelets, but not red blood cell transfusions following OPCAB 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".