SP7.1 - Risk Profile of Administration of 3- and 4-factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate in Adult Anticoagulated Trauma Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims To establish thromboembolic complication (TC, primary outcome) and mortality (secondary outcome) Odds Ratios (ORs) following 3-factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate (PCC3, Comparator Group [CG] 1) and 4-factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate (PCC4, CG2) administration, compared to Fresh Frozen Plasma (FFP) alone, in adult Vitamin K antagonist-anticoagulated trauma patients. Methods Systematic database and grey literature searches were performed. Random effects model meta-analyses were undertaken for each of this study’s outcomes, producing ORs and 95% Confidence Intervals (95%CIs). The I2 statistic was used to quantify interstudy heterogeneity. Inverse Variance, Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to examine interstudy demographic/treatment differences. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, study quality with the GRADE tool. Results 8 papers met inclusion criteria (CG1 n=3, CG2 n=3), 2 were excluded due to insufficient reported information. TC incidence was not significantly increased following PCC3 administration (ORcombined effect1.57, 95% CI 0.24-10.51, p=0.64). Meta-analysis was not performed on TC incidence in CG2 owing to only 1 paper reporting this outcome. Mortality risk was not significantly increased following PCC3 (ORcombined effect1.61, 95%CI 0.27-9.51, p=0.60) or PCC4 (ORcombined effect2.19, 95%CI 0.96-4.98, p=0.06) administration. Admission Injury Severity Score (ISS) and age varied significantly between papers included in CG1 (meanISS=15.5, 95%CI=12.0-20.1, p<0.05, meanage=75.3years, 95%CI=65.5-86.7, p<0.05) and CG2 (meanISS=15.1, 95%CI=13.4-17.0, p<0.05, meanage=79.2years, 95%CI=74.7-84.1, p<0.05). Conclusion TC risk is not overtly increased following PCC3 administration, compared to FFP. The same is true for mortality risk following PCC3 and PCC4 administration. There is substantial room for bias in the results reported, further research is warranted.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".