Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42038878›Full record

ReviewGalen medical journal2025

Comprehensive Coagulation Management in Cardiac Surgery: Anticoagulants, Heparin Resistance, Monitoring, and Bleeding Risks : Coagulation Management in Cardiac Surgery.

Sohrab Negargar, Elnaz Javanshir

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Galen medical journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sohrab NegargarCardiovascular Research Center of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.
Elnaz JavanshirCardiovascular Research Center of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Effective coagulation management is pivotal to optimizing outcomes in cardiac surgery, influencing bleeding risk, transfusion requirements, and overall perioperative safety. This comprehensive review examines current strategies, limitations, and emerging innovations across anticoagulant use, coagulation monitoring, and bleeding management. Unfractionated heparin remains the standard for cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) anticoagulation, owing to its rapid reversibility, though challenges such as heparin resistance persist. Alternatives including low molecular weight heparins, direct thrombin inhibitors, and novel oral anticoagulants are reserved for select indications and carry specific limitations. Perioperative coagulation monitoring is essential; tools such as activated clotting time (ACT), anti-factor Xa assays, and viscoelastic tests (e.g., thromboelastography [TEG] and rotational thromboelastometry [ROTEM]) guide targeted therapy. Despite these advances, bleeding remains common due to factors including preoperative antithrombotic therapy, CPB-induced coagulopathy, and postoperative hemostatic deficits. Management strategies center on prophylactic antifibrinolytics, individualized transfusion protocols, and the judicious use of reversal agents. Emerging frontiers including machine learning-enhanced viscoelastic algorithms, targeted antithrombotics (e.g., factor XI inhibitors), AI-based bleeding prediction, and gene therapy for inherited coagulopathies promise to personalize and improve care. Continued research is warranted to validate novel therapies and refine evidence-based protocols for coagulation management in cardiac surgery.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsBlood CoagulationCardiopulmonary BypassHeparinViscoelastic Testing

Identifiers

PMID42038878
PMCPMC12624253

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.