Using dalteparin in quotidian and nocturnal hemodialysis patients: A prospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Low-molecular weight heparin, such as dalteparin, is an alternative anticoagulation method in conventional hemodialysis (HD). However, there are limited studies on its use in quotidian and nocturnal HD. We assessed the optimal dose, treatment efficacy, and patient safety of dalteparin in quotidian and nocturnal HD populations. METHODS: This study included 10 quotidian (7 in-center and 3 home) and 8 nocturnal home HD patients. Dalteparin was initiated and titrated based on clotting score in these patients. Trough anti-Xa levels were measured. The dalteparin dose, the dialyzer and HD circuit clotting scores, and bleeding episodes were recorded at 4 weeks. Patients who continued dalteparin were followed to 12 months. FINDINGS: For the 10 quotidian HD patients, the median dalteparin dose was 1875 units [1250, 2500] after 4 weeks. For nocturnal HD patients, five of the eight patients switched back to heparin due to high clotting scores while on dalteparin within 4 weeks. However, three patients continued on dalteparin at 4 weeks. After 12 months, one maintained on 5000 units and the other two maintained on 7500 units of dalteparin. All the clotting scores at month 12 were ≤2. One patient died due to an unrelated cause. For all patients who continued on dalteparin, only 9% of the HD treatments had circuit clotting score >2 after reaching stable dose. All trough anti-Xa levels were <0.1 IU/mL. There were no episodes of bleeding. Fistula compression times were not increased. DISCUSSION: This small pilot study suggests that dalteparin can be used effectively and relatively safety in quotidian HD. However, its use in nocturnal HD was only successful in a small proportion of patients. Alternative methods, including second dalteparin bolus after 4 hours of HD treatment, should be assessed for efficacy and practicality.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".