Exploration of risk factors for non‐survival and for transfusion‐associated complications in cats receiving red cell transfusions: 450 cases (2009 to 2017)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe red blood cell transfusion practices and short-term outcomes in anaemic cats. To determine clinical variables associated with non-survival and transfusion-related complications. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, blood bank records from the Ontario Veterinary College Health Science Centre (OVC-HSC) were reviewed to identify cats that received packed red blood cells or whole blood from 2009 to 2017. We extracted cause of anaemia, history of previous transfusion, pre- and post-transfusion packed cell volume, pre-transfusion compatibility testing, volume and dose of blood product, age of red blood cell unit, transfusion-associated complications and patient survival. RESULTS: A total of 450 transfusion events were recorded in 267 cats. Blood loss was the most common indication for blood transfusion (44.9%), followed by ineffective erythropoiesis (37.5%) and red blood cell destruction (22.5%). Transfusion-associated complications occurred in 10.2% events and there was a 20.2% mortality after transfusion. Mean increase in packed cell volume 24-hours after transfusion was greater in cats undergoing major cross-match testing before transfusion (7.2%) versus those that did not (4.0%). Non-survival was associated with higher packed cell volume before transfusion, low patient body temperature before transfusion, anaemia due to blood loss and number of transfusions administered. Older age of transfused blood units was associated with non-survival and transfusion-related complications. CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: This study was observational and so our analyses were exploratory, but suggest that major cross-match before transfusion tended to have greater transfusion efficacy and transfusion of older blood products might have detrimental effects on survival.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".