Prothrombin Complex Concentrates for Perioperative Vitamin K Antagonist and Non–vitamin K Anticoagulant Reversal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vitamin K antagonist therapy is associated with an increased bleeding risk, and clinicians often reverse anticoagulation in patients who require emergency surgical procedures. Current guidelines for rapid anticoagulation reversal for emergency surgery recommend four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate and vitamin K coadministration. The authors reviewed the current evidence on prothrombin complex concentrate treatment for vitamin K antagonist reversal in the perioperative setting, focusing on comparative studies and in the context of intracranial hemorrhage and cardiac surgery. The authors searched Cochrane Library and PubMed between January 2008 and December 2017 and retrieved 423 English-language papers, which they then screened for relevance to the perioperative setting; they identified 36 papers to include in this review. Prothrombin complex concentrate therapy was consistently shown to reduce international normalized ratio rapidly and control bleeding effectively. In comparative studies with plasma, prothrombin complex concentrate use was associated with a greater proportion of patients achieving target international normalized ratios rapidly, with improved hemostasis. No differences in thromboembolic event rates were seen between prothrombin complex concentrate and plasma, with prothrombin complex concentrate also demonstrating a lower risk of fluid overload events. Overall, the studies the authors reviewed support current recommendations favoring prothrombin complex concentrate therapy in patients requiring vitamin K antagonist reversal before emergency surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".