The optimal management of anti-thrombotic therapy after valve replacement: certainties and uncertainties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anti-thrombotic therapy after valve replacement encompasses a number of different situations. Long-term anticoagulation of mechanical prostheses uses vitamin K antagonists with a target international normalized ratio adapted to the characteristics of the prosthesis and the patient. The association of low-dose aspirin is systematic in the American guidelines and more restrictive in the European guidelines. Early heparin therapy is frequently used early after mechanical valve replacement, although there are no precise recommendations regarding timing, type, and dose of drug. Direct oral anticoagulants are presently contraindicated in patients with mechanical prosthesis. The main advantage of bioprostheses is the absence of long-term anticoagulant therapy. Early anticoagulation is indicated after valve replacement for mitral bioprostheses, whereas aspirin is now favoured early after bioprosthetic valve replacement in the aortic position. Early dual antiplatelet therapy is indicated after transcatheter aortic valve implantation, followed by single antiplatelet therapy. However, this relies on low levels of evidence and optimization of anti-thrombotic therapy is warranted in these high-risk patients. Although guidelines are consistent in most instances, discrepancies and the low-level of evidence of certain recommendations highlight the need for further controlled trials, in particular with regard to the combination of antiplatelet therapy with oral anticoagulant and the early post-operative anti-thrombotic therapy following the procedure.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".