Coagulation system reaction to blood loss volume as a result of coronary artery bypass surgery in aspirin-resistant patients with coronary heart disease and arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. To assess the coagulation system reaction and blood loss volume depending on aspirin resistance in hypertensive patients with coronary heart disease who underwent bypass surgery. Design and methods. A total of 66 patients with arterial hypertension and coronary heart disease (angina pectoris of III-IV functional class according to Canadian classification) who underwent myocardial revascularization using extracorporeal circulation were examined. All patients were divided into two groups depending on aspirin resistance phenomenon. 22 aspirin-resistant patients formed the first group, the other group consisted of 44 aspirin-sensitive patients. The patients were 49 to 68 year old, and there were 27 women and 39 men. During intraoperative and postoperative periods blood loss was measured in all subjects. Results. We showed that 22 out of 66 patients were aspirin-resistant. No relationship between blood loss volume during intraoperative and postoperative periods and aspirin resistance was observed. All hemostatic system indices regardless of aspirin resistance phenomenon changed equally in both groups.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".