MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pharmacokinetics of Tranexamic Acid during Cardiopulmonary Bypass

2002· article· en· W2155007797 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiopulmonary bypassMedicineTranexamic acidPharmacokineticsAnesthesiaCardiac surgeryDosingArteryPharmacodynamicsSurgeryBlood lossPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TA) reduces blood loss and blood transfusion during heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). TA dosing has been empiric because only limited pharmacokinetic studies have been reported, and CPB effects have not been characterized. We hypothesized that many of the published TA dosing techniques would prove, with pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation, to yield unstable TA concentrations. METHODS: Thirty adult patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting, valve surgery, or repair of atrial septal defect received after induction of anesthesia: TA 50 mg/kg (n = 11), TA 100 mg/kg (n = 10), or TA 10 mg/kg (n = 10) over 15 min, with 1 mg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) maintenance infusion for 10 h. TA was measured in plasma using high performance liquid chromatography. Pharmacokinetic modeling was accomplished using a mixed effects technique. Models of increasing complexity were compared using Schwarz-Bayesian Criterion (SBC). RESULTS: Tranexamic acid concentrations rapidly fell in all three groups. Data were well fit to a 2-compartment model, and adjustments for CPB were supported by SBC. Assuming a body weight of 80 kg, our model estimates V1 = 10.3 l before CPB and 11.9 l during and after CPB; V2 = 8.5 l before CPB and 9.8 l during and after CPB; Cl1 = 0.15 l/s before CPB, 0.11 l/s during CPB, and 0.17 l/s after CPB; and Cl2 = 0.18 l/s before CPB and 0.21 l/s during and after CPB. Based on simulation of previous studies of TA efficacy, we estimate that a 30-min loading dose of 12.5 mg/kg with a maintenance infusion of 6.5 mg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) and 1 mg/kg added to the pump prime will maintain TA concentration greater than 334 microm, and a higher dose based on 30 mg/kg loading dose plus 16 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) continuous infusion and 2 mg/kg added to the pump prime would maintain TA concentrations greater than 800 microm. CONCLUSIONS: Tranexamic acid pharmacokinetics are influenced by CPB. Our TA pharmacokinetic model does not provide support for the wide range of TA dosing techniques that have been reported. Variation in TA efficacy from study to study and confusion about the optimal duration of TA treatment may be the result of dosing techniques that do not maintain stable, therapeutic TA concentrations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it