Antithrombotic therapy in pediatric ventricular assist devices: Multicenter survey of the European EXCOR Pediatric Investigator Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives:Mechanical circulatory support for pediatric heart failure patients with the Berlin Heart EXCOR ventricular assist system is the only approved and established bridging strategy for recovery or heart transplantation. In recent years, the burden of thromboembolic events has led to modifications of the recommended antithrombotic therapy. Therefore, we aimed to assess modifications of antithrombotic practice among the European EXCOR Pediatric Investigator Group members.Methods:We sent a questionnaire assessing seven aspects of antithrombotic therapy to 18 European hospitals using the EXCOR device for children. Returned questionnaires were analyzed and identified antithrombotic strategies were descriptively compared to “Edmonton protocol” recommendations developed for the US EXCOR pediatric approval study.Results:Analysis of 18 received surveys revealed substantial deviations from the Edmonton protocol, including earlier start of heparin therapy at 6–12 h postoperatively and in 50% of surveyed centers, monitoring of heparin effectiveness with aPTT assay, administering vitamin K antagonists before 12 months of age. About 39% of centers use higher international normalized ratio targets, and platelet inhibition is changed in 56% including the use of clopidogrel instead of dipyridamole. Significant inter-center variability with multiple deviations from the Edmonton protocol was discovered with only one center following the Edmonton protocol completely.Conclusion:Current antithrombotic practice among European EXCOR users representing the treatment of more than 600 pediatric patients has changed over time with a trend toward a more aggressive therapy. There is a need for systematic evidence-based evaluation and harmonization of developmentally adjusted antithrombotic management practices in prospective studies toward revised recommendations.
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 | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".