Only high levels of dabigatran attenuate catheter thrombosis in vitro and in rabbits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In patients with mechanical heart valves, thromboembolic events were more frequent with dabigatran, an oral thrombin inhibitor, than with warfarin. This observation raises the possibility that dabigatran may be less effective than conventional anticoagulants in patients with other blood-contacting devices, such as catheters. To address this, we compared the capacity of dabigatran and/or heparin to inhibit catheter-induced thrombin generation in vitro and to attenuate catheter occlusion in rabbits. Using a catheter-induced thrombin generation assay, concentrations of dabigatran over 100 ng/ml prolonged the lag time and time to peak thrombin, and reduced the peak thrombin concentration and endogenous thrombin potential in a concentration-dependent fashion. Compared with saline in a rabbit model of catheter thrombosis, dabigatran prolonged the mean time to catheter occlusion by 2.9- and 1.9-fold when plasma levels were 173 and 140 ng/ml, respectively; values comparable to median peak levels in humans given dabigatran 150 mg twice daily. In contrast, low-dose dabigatran, which produced a level of 60 ng/ml; a value comparable to the trough level of dabigatran in humans, did not prolong the time to occlusion. Whereas a 70 U/kg bolus of heparin prolonged the mean time to occlusion by 3.4-fold, a 15 U/kg bolus had no effect. When low-dose dabigatran was given in combination with 15 U/kg heparin, the mean time to occlusion was prolonged by 2.7-fold. These findings suggest that only peak levels of dabigatran are sufficient to prevent catheter-induced clotting unless supplemented heparin is given.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".