Combined propofol and remifentanil intravenous anesthesia for pediatric patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A prospective observational case series of children receiving light general anesthesia for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed. Our purpose was to examine the merit of anesthesia and recovery/discharge times of combined remifentanil and propofol total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in spontaneously breathing children. METHODS: After IRB approval and informed consent, 56 patients receiving Remi/Propofol TIVA (Remifentanil 10 microg.ml(-1) Propofol 10 mg.ml(-1)) were observed. Blood pressure, respiratory rate, endtidal CO(2) (P(E)CO(2)), oxygen saturation and temperature were recorded at the start and finish of anesthesia. In addition, induction and recovery times were noted. Recovery time was from scan completion until discharge from the initial recovery area. Discharge time was from scan completion to discharge home. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients received Remi/Propofol TIVA. The mean Remi/Propofol recovery and discharge times were 8.9 and 28.2 min, respectively. There was a statistically significant decrease in respiratory rate and increase in CO(2) from the start to the end of the procedure. During the scan, seven patients moved. One patient experienced postprocedure nausea and or vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of remifentanil and propofol for TIVA may be an effective method of light general anesthesia in pediatric patients undergoing MRI.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".