Incidence and Management of Thrombotic and Thromboembolic Complications Following the Superior Cavopulmonary Anastomosis Procedure: A Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this literature review was to estimate the incidence of thrombosis and thromboembolism associated with the superior cavopulmonary anastomosis (SCPA) procedure and its variants and to examine current thromboprophylaxis regimens utilized. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from inception to August 2017 for all prospective and retrospective cohort studies explicitly reporting incidence of thrombosis, thromboembolism, or shunt occlusion in neonates, infants, and children undergoing 1 or more variants of the SCPA procedure. End points included thrombotic events and thromboembolic events (strokes and pulmonary embolisms) as primary outcomes, and overall mortality as a secondary outcome, at the last available follow-up time point. Of 1303 unique references identified, 13 cohort studies were deemed eligible. Reported incidence of thrombosis and thromboembolic events ranged from 0% to 28.0% and from 0% to 12.5%, respectively. Reported incidence of major bleeding events ranged from 0% to 2.9%. Reported overall mortality ranged from 2.5% to 50.5% across studies. Thromboprophylaxis protocols varied across institutions and studies, most commonly involving unfractionated heparin (UFH), warfarin, enoxaparin, acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), or combinations of ASA and warfarin, ASA and low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), UFH and LMWH, and UFH and ASA; several studies did not specify a protocol. Due to substantial variability in reported event rates, no clear correlation was identified between prophylaxis protocols and postoperative thrombotic complications. Despite guidance recommending postoperative UFH as standard practice, thromboprophylaxis protocols varied across institutions and studies. More robust trials evaluating different thromboprophylaxis regimens for the management of these patients are warranted.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".