Bleeding risk of surgery and its prevention in patients with inherited platelet disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excessive bleeding at surgery is a feared complication in patients with inherited platelet disorders. However, very few studies have evaluated the frequency of surgical bleeding in these hemorrhagic disorders. We performed a worldwide, multicentric, retrospective study to assess the bleeding complications of surgery, the preventive and therapeutic approaches adopted, and their efficacy in patients with inherited platelet disorders: the Surgery in Platelet disorders And Therapeutic Approach (SPATA) study. We rated the outcome of 829 surgical procedures carried out in 423 patients with well-defined forms of inherited platelet disorders: 238 inherited platelet function disorders and 185 inherited platelet number disorders. Frequency of surgical bleeding was high in patients with inherited platelet disorders (19.7%), with a significantly higher bleeding incidence in inherited platelet function disorders (24.8%) than in inherited platelet number disorders (13.4%). The frequency of bleeding varied according to the type of inherited platelet disorder, with biallelic Bernard Soulier syndrome having the highest occurrence (44.4%). Frequency of bleeding was predicted by a pre-operative World Health Organization bleeding score of 2 or higher. Some types of surgery were associated with a higher bleeding incidence, like cardiovascular and urological surgery. The use of pre-operative pro-hemostatic treatments was associated with a lower bleeding frequency in patients with inherited platelet function disorders but not in inherited platelet number disorders. Desmopressin, alone or with antifibrinolytic agents, was the preventive treatment associated with the lowest bleedings. Platelet transfusions were used more frequently in patients at higher bleeding risk. Surgical bleeding risk in inherited platelet disorders is substantial, especially in inherited platelet function disorders, and bleeding history, type of disorder, type of surgery and female sex are associated with higher bleeding frequency. Prophylactic pre-operative pro-hemostatic treatments appear to be required and are associated with a lower bleeding incidence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".