MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perioperative Management for Congenital Factor XI Deficiency; A Systematic Review

2016· review· en· W2605710025 on OpenAlexaff
Chatree Chai‐Adisaksopha, Thanawat Rattanathammethee, M Drakulić, Davide Matino, Alfonso Iorio

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTranexamic acidPerioperativeSurgeryComplicationRecombinant factor VIIaFresh frozen plasmaInternal medicinePlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Congenital Factor XI (FXI) deficiency is the most common rare bleeding disorder, characterized by production defect of FXI. Bleeding manifestation is usually mild and associated with trauma or surgery. The treatment options during surgery include plasma, FXI concentrate, recombinant activated factor VII (rFVIIa), etc. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of hemostatic control and thrombotic complications in patients with congenital FXI deficiency who underwent surgery or an invasive procedure. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL database from inception to March 2016. We included the case reports and case series of patients with congenital FXI deficiency. Studies must report the perioperative treatment regimen, hemostatic outcome and thromboembolic complication. The pre- and post-FXI levels were collected. The primary outcome was the efficacy of hemostatic control and the safety outcome was thromboembolic complication. Results: There were 87 studies included in this review, involving 310 patients with congenital FXI deficiency. Median age was 49.5 years (range 0.3 to 94). Forty percent of the patients were male. Median baseline FXI level was 6.0% (range <1 to 75.0). FXI concentrate was the most common treatment (48.39%), following by plasma (21.61%), rFVIIa (12.90%) and others (FEIBA, DDAVP, tranexamic acid and no treatment; 17.1%). Hemostatic control was found to be good or excellent in 118 patients (88.06%) who had major surgery, 65 patients (92.85%) in minor surgery and 47 patients (97.91%) in dental procedure, Table 1. Thromboembolic events were reported in 7/150 (4.67%) patients treated with FXI concentrate and 4/34 (11.76%) patients treated with rFVIIa, Table 2. None of patients receiving plasma, FEIBA, DDAVP or tranexamic acid had thrombosis. Conclusion: Hemostatic control during perioperative periodwas achieved in majority of patients with congenital FXI. Peak plasma FXI should be obtained in patients treated with plasma or FXI concentrate with the target FXI of 60-70% for major surgery and 40-50% for minor surgery. With respect to the higher risk of thromboembolic complication, we recommend plasma over FXI concentrate and rFVIIa for perioperative treatment in patients with FXI deficiency. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207