Prevention of sevoflurane related emergence agitation in children undergoing adenotonsillectomy: A comparison of dexmedetomidine and propofol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Emergence agitation (EA) in children is increased after sevoflurane anesthesia. Propofol and dexmedetomidine have been used for prophylactic treatment with controversial results. The aim of the present study was to compare the effect of a single dose of propofol or dexmedetomidine prior to termination of sevoflurane-based anesthesia on the incidence and severity of EA in children. METHODS: One hundred and twenty children, American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II, 2-6 years old undergoing adenotonsillectomy under sevoflurane based anesthesia were enrolled in the study. Children were randomly allocated to one of the three equal groups: (Group C) received 10 ml saline 0.9%, (Group P) received propofol 1 mg/kg or (group D) received dexmedetomidine 0.3 ug/kg(-1). The study drugs were administered 5 min before the end of surgery. In post anesthesia care unit (PACU), the incidence of EA was assessed with Aonos four point scale and the severity of EA was assessed with pediatric anesthesia emergence delirium scale upon admission (T0), after 5 min (T5), 15 min (T15) and 30 min (T30). Extubation time, emergence time, duration of PACU stay and pain were assessed. RESULTS: The incidence and severity of EA were lower in group P and group D compared to group C at T0, T5 and T15. The incidence and severity of EA in group P were significantly higher than group D at the same times. The incidence and severity of EA decreased significantly over time in all groups. The modified Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale was significantly lower in group D compared to group C and group P. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine 0.3 ug/kg(1) was more effective than propofol 1 mg/kg in decreasing the incidence and severity of EA, when administered 5 min before the end of surgery in children undergoing adenotonsillectomy under sevoflurane anesthesia.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".