MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evaluation of the effects of levobupivacaine on clotting and fibrinolysis using thromboelastography

2000· article· en· W1968469544 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Simon Léonard, Meg Walsh, A. Lydon, Brendan O’Hare, G. Shorten

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsThromboelastographyMedicineFibrinolysisLevobupivacaineThromboelastometryAnesthesiaCardiologyInternal medicineCoagulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amide local anaesthetics inhibit platelet function. We hypothesized that residual anaesthetic in the epidural space could decrease efficacy of an epidural blood patch in preventing postdural puncture headache. Levobupivacaine has recently been approved for epidural anaesthesia. Its effects on coagulation have not previously been studied. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of levobupivacaine on clotting using thromboelastography. Ten ASA Class I volunteers were studied. Venous blood samples were analysed using a Haemoscope 2000D TEG analyser. Whole blood, a 50% saline control and two levobupivacaine solutions (2.5 mg mL(-1) and 2.5 microg mL(-1) in blood) were compared. The former reproduces that produced in the epidural space by blood (20 mL for an epidural blood patch) and levobupivacaine 0.5% (20 mL). The latter approximates plasma concentrations following epidural injection of levobupivacaine 0.5% (20 mL). P < 0.05 was considered significant. Maximum amplitude (MA), a measure of clot strength, is decreased by levobupivacaine 2.5 mg mL(-1). Levobupivacaine 2.5 mg mL(-1) decreases clot strength and may reduce efficacy of a prophylactic epidural blood patch.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207