Impact of anticoagulation levels on outcomes in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the STEEPLE trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To determine the relationship between anticoagulation levels during percutaneous coronary intervention, and ischaemic events and bleeding. METHODS AND RESULTS: A sub-analysis from the STEEPLE trial was conducted. Pre-defined target anticoagulation levels were achieved in 86% of patients receiving enoxaparin, compared with 20% receiving unfractionated heparin (UFH) (P < 0.001). A significant relationship was observed between anti-Xa levels > 0.9 IU/mL and covariate-adjusted rate of non-coronary artery bypass graft-related major and minor bleeding [odds ratio (OR) 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.5 for each unit of anti-Xa; P = 0.03]; anti-Xa levels and covariate-adjusted incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization showed no significance (P = 0.47). Major bleeding increased significantly with an activated clotting time (ACT) > 325 s (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1-2.2 per 100 s; P = 0.04). A significant relationship with increasing ischaemic events was observed when ACT was < 325 s (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.2-0.8 per 100 s; P = 0.006) indicating a narrow therapeutic window. CONCLUSION: Target anticoagulation levels were achieved more readily in patients receiving enoxaparin. An anti-Xa level of up to 0.9 IU/mL has a good safety and efficacy profile; poor achievement of target ACT with UFH makes assessing the optimal range difficult.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".