Pharmacological reversal of the direct oral anticoagulants—A comprehensive review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (SPAF) and the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolic disease (VTE). Although DOAC-associated bleeding events are less frequent as compared to vitamin K antagonists, there is significant concern surrounding physicians' ability to evaluate and manage DOAC-associated bleeding when it does occur. Idarucizumab is a specific reversal agent for dabigatran and is the agent of choice for dabigatran reversal in the setting of major bleeding or urgent surgery/procedures. There are no commercially available specific reversal agents for the direct Xa inhibitors. Although they have not been rigorously studied in DOAC-treated patients requiring urgent anticoagulant reversal, limited evidence from in vitro studies, animal bleeding models, human volunteer studies (in vivo and in vitro) and case series suggest that coagulation factor replacement with prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC) and activated PCC (FEIBA) may contribute to hemostasis. However, the safety and efficacy of these agents and the optimal dosing strategies remain uncertain.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".