Heparin Dose and Postoperative Bleeding in Patients Undergoing Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heparin is the most widely used anticoagulant for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Several authors suggest that lower doses of heparin during CPB would produce lower postoperative chest tube losses and fewer transfusion events. In the present study, a heparin dose–response (HDR) test was used to determine the heparin dose for each patient. We hypothesize that higher doses of heparin do not cause increased postoperative bleeding and transfusion events in postoperative patients undergoing CPB when the heparin dose is determined by a HDR test. This prospective observational study followed 66 patients undergoing CPB-supported primary coronary artery bypass grafting. Patients were placed in one of two groups, sensitive (n = 37) or resistant (n = 29) based on the result of a HDR test slope. Data on patient characteristics, secondary outcomes, transfusion, and the primary outcome, chest tube losses, were collected. Patient characteristics differed in the baseline activated coagulation time (ACT) and thromboelastograph G parameter as well as number of patients with hypercholesterolemia. The resistant group had lower postheparin and postprotamine ACTs and heparin sensitivity index. Initial heparin dose, total heparin dose, heparin dose per kilogram, HDR, and protamine dose were higher in the heparin-resistant group. The primary outcome, postoperative chest tube loss volume, was collected at four time points and the two groups were then compared. The heparin-resistant group was noninferior to the sensitive group and had clinically fewer transfused patients and transfusion events. The resistant group was noninferior to the sensitive group with respect to chest tube losses at all measured time points. Higher doses of heparin determined by a HDR test do not cause increased postoperative chest tube losses or increased transfusion events.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".