Neonatal central venous catheter thrombosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thrombotic occlusion of central venous catheters (CVCs) is a common problem in newborns. There is no guideline that systematically addresses the diagnosis, management, and prevention of this complication. The objective of this review is to establish evidence-based guidance for the management of CVC-related thrombosis. A comprehensive search of the scientific literature was conducted from 1948 to 2012. Twenty-six articles fulfilling four criteria - humans, neonates aged below 28 days, CVC insertion, and English language - were included for analysis. The incidence of thrombosis was 9.2% (308/3332). Singly inserted umbilical venous catheters (UVCs) and peripherally inserted central catheters accounted for over 80% of all CVCs. Frequently reported thrombotic sites were the hepatic vein, right atrium, and inferior vena cava. Symptoms included distal swelling of affected areas and thrombocytopenia. Increased length of catheter stay, infusion of blood products and malpositioned UVCs were identified as risk factors. The commonest diagnostic investigations to confirm thrombosis were echocardiography and ultrasonography. Spontaneous resolution may occur in UVC-related thrombosis, but this warrants close monitoring. Thrombolysis with urokinase alone or combined with low-molecular-weight heparin might be effective and well tolerated as treatment strategies. Prophylactic heparin increases the duration of catheter usability (P < 0.005, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.81), decreases catheter occlusion, but may not uniformly prevent thrombosis. CVL-related thrombosis is an underreported complication because events in the majority occur silently. Currently, solid evidence-based recommendations for diagnosis and treatment are not possible. Well designed prospective studies are urgently required to establish a concrete investigational approach to CVC-related thrombosis and to institute safe therapeutic modalities.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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".