Complications of Factor V Leiden in Adults Undergoing Noncardiac Surgical Procedures: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Factor V Leiden is the commonest hereditary prothrombotic allele, affecting 1% to 5% of the world's population. The objective of this study was to characterize the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of patients with Factor V Leiden compared to patients without a diagnosis of hereditary thrombophilia. This was a focused systematic review of studies including adult (>18 years) patients with Factor V Leiden (heterozygous or homozygous) undergoing noncardiac surgery. Included studies were either randomized controlled trials or observational. The primary clinical outcomes of interest were thromboembolic events occurring from the perioperative period up to 1 year postoperatively, defined as deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or other clinically significant thrombosis occurring during or after a surgical procedure. Secondary outcomes included cerebrovascular events, cardiac events, death, transplant-related outcomes, and surgery-specific morbidity. Pediatric and obstetrical patients were excluded, as were case reports and case series. Databases searched included MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception until August 2021. Study bias was assessed through the CLARITY (Collaboration of McMaster University researchers) Risk of Bias tools, and heterogeneity through analysis of study design and end points, as well as the I 2 statistic with its confidence interval and the Q statistic. A total of 5275 potentially relevant studies were identified, with 115 having full text assessed for eligibility and 32 included in the systematic review. On the whole, the literature suggests that patients with Factor V Leiden have an increased risk of perioperative and postoperative thromboembolic events compared to patients without the diagnosis. Increased risk was also seen in relation to surgery-specific morbidity and transplant-related outcomes, particularly arterial thrombotic events. The literature did not support an increased risk for mortality, cerebrovascular, or cardiac complications. Limitations of the data include predisposition toward bias due in many study designs and small sample sizes across the majority of published studies. Variable outcome definitions and durations of patient follow-up across different surgical procedures resulted in high study heterogeneity precluding the effective use of meta-analysis. Factor V Leiden status may confer additional risk for surgery-related adverse outcomes. Large, adequately powered studies are required to accurately estimate the degree of this risk by zygosity.
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 | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".