A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Preoperative Antithrombin Supplementation in Patients at Risk for Antithrombin Deficiency After Cardiac Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antithrombin (AT) activity is reduced during cardiac operations with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), which is associated with adverse outcomes. Preoperative AT supplementation, to achieve >58% and <100% AT activity, may potentially reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality in cardiac operations with CPB. This prospective, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of preoperative treatment with AT supplementation in patients at risk for low AT activity after undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB. METHODS: A total of 425 adult patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either a single dose of AT (n = 213) to achieve an absolute increase of 20% above pretreatment AT activity or placebo (n = 212) before surgery. The study duration was approximately 7 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the percentage of patients with any component of a major morbidity composite (postoperative mortality, stroke, acute kidney injury [AKI], surgical reexploration, arterial or venous thromboembolic events, prolonged mechanical ventilation, and infection) in the 2 groups. Secondary end points included AT activity, blood loss, transfusion requirements, duration of intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital stays. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 399 patients (men, n = 300, 75.2%) with a mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of 66.1 (11.7) years, with the majority undergoing complex surgical procedures (n = 266, 67.9%), were analyzed. No differences in the percentage of patients experiencing morbidity composite outcomes between groups were observed (AT-treated 68/198 [34.3%] versus placebo 58/194 [29.9%]; P = .332; relative risk, 1.15). After AT infusion, AT activity was significantly higher in the AT group (108% [42-143]) versus placebo group (76% [40-110]), and lasted up to postoperative day 2. At ICU, the frequency of patients with AT activity ≥58% in the AT group (81.5%) was significantly higher ( P < .001) versus placebo group (43.2%). Secondary end point analysis did not show any advantage of AT over placebo group. There were significantly more patients with AKI ( P < .001) in the AT group (23/198; 11.6%) than in the placebo group (5/194, 2.6%). Safety results showed no differences in treatment-emergent adverse events nor bleeding events between groups. CONCLUSIONS: AT supplementation did not attenuate adverse postoperative outcomes in our cohort of patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".