MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977061078 · doi:10.1097/aco.0b013e328308bb70

Regional anesthesia for carotid surgery

2008· review· en· W1977061078 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne Guay

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Anaesthesiology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMepivacaineLidocaineAnesthesiaCarotid endarterectomyRopivacaineBupivacaineLocal anestheticComplicationSurgeryNerve blockAnestheticEpinephrineCervical plexus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Evidence from retrospective studies suggests that regional anesthesia reduces the risks of major complications associated with carotid endarterectomy compared with general anesthesia, namely: stroke, stroke/death, death and myocardial infarction. RECENT FINDINGS: A superficial cervical plexus block is the regional anesthetic technique of choice. It is as efficacious as a combined (superficial and deep) cervical plexus block and carries substantially less risk of inducing a life-threatening complication from the block placement than a cervical epidural or a deep cervical plexus block. Lidocaine, mepivacaine, bupivacaine and ropivacaine are all suitable agents for this block but bupivacaine provides the longest duration of postoperative analgesia. The addition of epinephrine 1: 300,000 (3.75 microg/ml) reduces maximal blood concentrations of lidocaine and bupivacaine without inducing any adverse hemodynamic effects. SUMMARY: The anesthesiologist should learn how to place a superficial cervical plexus block. The technique is easy to master, effective and carries a low risk of inducing a serious complication.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.889
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations49
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in AnaesthesiologySame topicCerebrovascular and Carotid Artery DiseasesFrench-language works237,207