Adult and pediatric mechanical circulation: a guide for the hematologist
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is the overarching term that encompasses the temporary and durable devices used in patients with severe heart failure. MCS disturbs the hematologic and coagulation system, leading to platelet activation, activation of the contact pathway of coagulation, and acquired von Willebrand syndrome. Ischemic stroke and major hemorrhage occur in up to 30% of patients. Hematologists are an essential part of the MCS team because they understand the delicate balance between bleeding and clotting and alteration of hemostasis with antithrombotic therapy. However, prior to this important collaborative role, learning the terminology used in the field and types of MCS devices allows improved communication with the MCS team and best patient care. Understanding which antithromobotic therapies are used at baseline is also required to provide recommendations if hemorrhage or thrombosis occurs. Additional challenging consultations in MCS patients include the influence of thrombophilia on the risk for thrombosis and management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. This narrative review will provide a foundation to understand MCS devices how to prevent, diagnose, and manage MCS thrombosis for the practicing hematologist.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".