2013
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.24621
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Thrombin formation and effect of unfractionated heparin during pediatric cardiac catheterization

Abstract: Thrombin generation was enhanced in patients who did not receive UFH, which may increase the risk of thrombotic complications. In group A, routine heparinization seemed excessive by all monitoring methods. UFH prevented an increase in prothrombin to thrombin conversion, resulting in unaltered fibrin formation. The current UFH protocol seemed to have no effect on postprocedural activation of coagulation. Further studies are needed to clarify adequate heparin dosing for children during cardiac catheterization to… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
(38 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, most procedures lasted <60 minutes, and the study population size does not allow for a statistical evaluation of the effect of antithrombotic prophylaxis in longer procedure times. In a recent paediatric study, however, the measured level of heparinisation correlated negatively with procedure time 31 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, most procedures lasted <60 minutes, and the study population size does not allow for a statistical evaluation of the effect of antithrombotic prophylaxis in longer procedure times. In a recent paediatric study, however, the measured level of heparinisation correlated negatively with procedure time 31 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…In a recent paediatric study, however, the measured level of heparinisation correlated negatively with procedure time. 31 A total of only 15 emboli, <0.1% of the total number detected, were not directly temporally related to a specific catheter or device manipulation. These signals, which we have determined to label as random, were instead detected during a period of occluder device preparation or, more commonly, following balloon inflation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%