Depth of anesthesia with desflurane does not influence the endocrine‐metabolic response to pelvic surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It has been reported that, with deep levels of anesthesia achieved with general anesthetic agents and opioids, post-operative consumption of morphine and pain intensity can be reduced. It is not clear whether the depth of anesthesia modifies pain intensity by influencing the endocrine-metabolic stress response. The purpose of this study was to assess the influence of a high concentration of desflurane on peri-operative plasma cortisol. METHODS: The study was prospective and observer blinded, and included 20 women scheduled for elective total abdominal hysterectomy. They were randomly divided in to two groups: a deep group (D) (n=10) and a light group (L) (n=10). Anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl and rocuronium: desflurane was administered at two different concentrations according to Bispectral Index monitoring (deep, 25 and light, 50). Post-operative pain relief was achieved with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine. Blood samples were taken before, during and after surgery for the measurement of plasma cortisol, glucose and lactate. Post-operative pain visual analog scale (VAS) and morphine consumption were recorded at regular intervals for the first 24 h. RESULTS: The Concentrations of plasma cortisol, glucose and lactate increased with surgery in both groups, and remained elevated, with no difference between the two groups. VAS and morphine consumptions were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: The results show that there is no relationship between the intra-operative level of anesthesia depth achieved with desflurane and the extent of endocrine-metabolic stress response.
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 | 0.000 | 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".