Comparison of arterial and venous whole blood clot initiation, formation, and strength by thromboelastography in anesthetized swine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thromboelastography (TEG) analysis was used to determine if differences exist between venous and arterial samples in anesthetized swine, using identical sampling techniques for each of the samples. We hypothesized that TEG parameters would not differ between native whole blood venous and arterial samples. Thirty male Landrace swines were included in the study. Both the femoral artery and vein were catheterized using standard cut-down techniques and with identically sized catheters to rule out any catheter size effects on the results. Standard TEG parameters for native whole venous and arterial blood samples (r, K, α, MA, G, and coagulation index) were measured or calculated, and t-test or Mann-Whitney rank-sum test used for comparison when appropriate. Significant differences were detected for r (venous < arterial), K (venous < arterial), α (venous > arterial), and coagulation index (venous > arterial) TEG parameters. No significant differences were measured for MA or G. These differences are important, especially when temporal changes in TEG are utilized to monitor patient stability and fluid therapy protocols using trends in coagulation properties. Taken together, these results suggest that clots are more likely to form at a faster rate in venous samples compared to arterial samples, but the overall clot strength does not differ. Therefore, if TEG analysis is being used to monitor coagulation profiles in a patient, care should be taken to use the same site and technique if results are to be used for comparative purposes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".