Duration of Anesthesia before Muscle Relaxant Injection Influences Level of Paralysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dosage guidelines for muscle relaxants are based on dose-response studies, normally performed after several minutes of stable nitrous oxide (N O)-opioid anesthesia. However, relaxants are used immediately after induction of anesthesia. The study was designed to determine the influence of the duration of anesthesia and N O on the onset time at the adductor pollicis (AP) and the corrugator supercilii (CS) muscles of maximum neuromuscular blockade after mivacurium. METHODS: After institutional approval and informed consent, patients were randomly allocated into three groups. Anesthesia was induced with alfentanil and propofol. Group A (n = 10) received mivacurium (0.1 mg/kg) immediately after loss of consciousness. Groups B (n = 10) and C (n = 10) received mivacurium after 15 min of anesthesia with propofol alone (B) or propofol with N O (C). The evoked response to train-of-four stimulation was measured by acceleromyography at the AP and the CS. RESULTS: Maximum neuromuscular blockade (%T1, median [range]) was significantly less in group A than in groups B and C ( < 0.001) at both the AP (81 [47-90]; 90 [35-100]; 100 [93-100], respectively) and the CS (19 [5-63]; 68 [61-100]; 89 [72-100], respectively). Maximum neuromuscular blockade was less in group B than in group C ( < 0.001) at the AP. Onset time of maximum neuromuscular blockade was not different between groups but was shorter at the CS than at the AP. CONCLUSIONS: Duration of anesthesia and N O before mivacurium injection affect intensity of neuromuscular blockade but not onset time. Neuromuscular blockade obtained at the AP after several minutes of stable anesthesia with N O is greater than immediately after induction. This explains in part the discrepancy between the measured ED and the intubating dose.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".