MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414282148 · doi:10.1016/j.rpth.2025.103186

Neuraxial analgesia in pregnant individuals with bleeding disorders: a retrospective descriptive study of obstetric anesthesia practices and outcomes

2025· article· en· W4414282148 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jun Yi, Bonnie Niu, Lisa Duffett, Darine El‐Chaâr, Alan Tinmouth, Tzu‐Fei Wang, Roy Khalifé

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuraxial blockadeObstetric anesthesiaRetrospective cohort studyMultidisciplinary approachPregnancyCesarean delivery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Neuraxial analgesia is an effective and advantageous technique for managing labor pain. Yet, clinicians often hesitate to offer neuraxial analgesia to parturients with inherited bleeding disorders because of fear of epidural or spinal hematoma and the absence of high-quality evidence to guide decision-making in practice. Objectives: To describe obstetric analgesia practices and outcomes in pregnant individuals with bleeding disorders managed at a tertiary care center. Methods: We performed a retrospective descriptive study of all deliveries (January 2010-July 2021) managed by the Ottawa Regional Bleeding Disorders Program. Patient, laboratory, peripartum anesthetic data, and antenatal anesthesia and hematology recommendations were collected from electronic health records and summarized descriptively. Results: Eighty-two deliveries occurred in 56 pregnant individuals (median age, 31 years). The most common disorders were type 1 von Willebrand disease (34.1%) and hemophilia A (29.3%). Neuraxial analgesia was used in 59 of 82 deliveries (72.0%). Third-trimester hemostatic profiles met predefined "adequate" thresholds in 54 of 79 evaluable deliveries (68.4%). Of the 25 deliveries below target, 13 still received neuraxial analgesia, and 10 of those received factor replacement beforehand. Antenatal recommendations from anesthesiology and hematology were documented in 47 cases, with agreement in 45 (95.7%). No epidural or spinal hematomas occurred. Minor morbidity included 1 postdural puncture headache (1.7%) and 2 cases of localized back pain (3.4%). Conclusion: With multidisciplinary planning and evidence-aligned laboratory targets, neuraxial analgesia was offered safely to most pregnant individuals with bleeding disorders within our cohort. Larger multicenter studies and registry initiatives are warranted to refine factor-specific thresholds and standardize care pathways for this patient population.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch and Practice in Thrombosis and HaemostasisSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207