MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2591784403 · doi:10.1182/blood.v104.11.527.527

The Risk of Hemorrhage and the Frequency of Vitamin K Use in Asymptomatic Patients with Warfarin-Associated Coagulopathy.

2004· article· en· W2591784403 on OpenAlexaff
David García, Mark Crowther, Elaine M. Hylek

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWarfarinAsymptomaticProthrombin complex concentrateCoagulopathyVitamin K antagonistEmergency medicineInternal medicinePediatricsSurgeryAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Warfarin, although highly effective in preventing thromboembolism, can cause hemorrhage. For warfarin-treated patients, the risk of bleeding increases as the International Normalized Ratio (INR) rises, particularly if the INR exceeds 4. Although low-dose oral vitamin K reliably decreases supratherapeutic INR values, previous surveys indicate that many providers choose not to administer vitamin K to asymptomatic patients who present with excessive INR prolongation. In effort to help guide the management of asymptomatic outpatients with elevated INRs, we assessed the rate of hemorrhage as well as the frequency of vitamin K use in an observational study. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients taking warfarin was assembled from 101 sites with personnel designated as warfarin managers across the United States during the period August 2000 to December 2001; 98 sites were community-based physician office practices. Enrolled practices participated in mandatory on-site study training and all patients provided written informed consent. Patients with a first observed episode of INR ≥5.0 were identified. For the two-week period following the index INR, provider-generated outpatient progress notes that pertained to anticoagulation (and were part of the medical record) were individually reviewed by one of the investigators. Outcomes included: site-specific management of elevated INR (recorded vitamin K use versus simple withholding of warfarin), and number of patients sustaining a major hemorrhage within the 2 weeks following the index INR value. Major hemorrhage was defined as fatal, necessitating hospitalization with transfusion of at least 2 units of packed red blood cells, or occurring at a critical site (e.g., intracranial, retroperitoneal). Results: During the study period, 6,792 patients were enrolled providing 5,961 person-years of follow-up. Of these, 979 had a first observed episode of an INR of more than 5. Thirty-nine % of these patients were receiving warfarin for atrial fibrillation and 29% had a prosthetic heart valve. Mean age was 69 years (range 20–94) and 50% were women. Ninety-six % (n=937) of the INRs were between 5 and 9. Ninety-eight % (n=963) were managed exclusively as outpatients; management could not be assessed in 16 patients who were hospitalized for unrelated reasons. Patients with an INR >9 were more likely to receive vitamin K compared to those with an INR of 5.0 to 9.0 (62% versus 7%). The mean INR for those patients known to have received vitamin K was 9.9 versus 6.2 among those for whom no vitamin K use was recorded. Of the 979 patients, 99.7% (n=976) had 14-day follow-up information. Nine patients sustained a major hemorrhage within the 2-week period (0.9%), mean INR 9.4, none were fatal. Conclusions: Among asymptomatic patients with warfarin-induced coagulopathy, an intervention known to reduce the INR (low-dose oral vitamin K) is used infrequently, particularly for patients whose INR value is 9 or less. For asymptomatic warfarin-treated individuals who are managed in the outpatient setting and whose INR is less than 9, the short-term risk of major bleeding appears to be low. Prospective, controlled trials are needed to determine the risks and benefits of administering vitamin K to this population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→