Fixed-Dose Four-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate for Reversal of Anticoagulation: Evaluation of Efficacy, Safety, and Cost Savings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is used for warfarin reversal and off-label management of bleeding in patients taking direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Dosing strategies that optimize hemostatic efficacy and cost, such as fixed dosing of 4F-PCC, are still under evaluation. The objective of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost savings of fixed-dosing of 4F-PCC (1,500 IU for warfarin, 2,000 IU for DOACs). Methods: Patients records from October 1, 2018, to April 30, 2021, at three hospitals within the Froedtert Health System were retrospectively reviewed for individuals who received fixed-dosing of 4F-PCC. Safety and efficacy were reflected in 30-day bleeding and thrombosis events, the need for repeat doses, and all-cause mortality. Cost savings were defined as the difference in the cost between the administration of fixed-dosing and the projected weight- and international normalized ratio (INR)-based dosing based on the package insert for warfarin reversal or 50 IU/kg in patients treated with DOACs. Results: A total of 592 patients received fixed-dosing of 4F-PCC during the prespecified period, of whom 541 received it for warfarin reversal (n = 414) or DOACs (n = 127) management in emergency settings. INR below 2 was achieved in 89% of patients on warfarin. Less than 5% in either group required repeat doses of 4F-PCC. Within 30 days, both groups had similar bleeding (12%) and thrombotic (5%) events. All-cause 30-day mortality rates in patients treated with warfarin and DOACs were 24% and 30%, respectively. The median cost savings of fixed-dosing per patient on warfarin and DOACs were $1,567 and $3,936, respectively, with annualized median hospital cost savings of $176,239 and $146,733, respectively. Conclusions: Fixed-dosing of 4F-PCC had significantly less cost than adjusted dose and is associated with similar rates of thrombosis and death compared to other studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".