Phasic Genioglossus and Palatoglossus Muscle Activity during Recovery from Sevoflurane Anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inhalational anesthetic effects on upper airway muscle activity in children are largely unknown. The authors tested the hypothesis that phasic inspiratory genioglossus and palatoglossus activity increases during recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia in a dose-dependent manner in children. METHODS: Sixteen children, aged 2.0 to 6.9 yr, scheduled for elective urological surgery were studied. Electromyogram recordings were acquired using intramuscular needle electrodes during spontaneous ventilation. After a 15-min period of equilibration, electromyogram activity was recorded over 30 s at each of three end-tidal concentrations, 1.5, 1.0, and 0.5 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC), administered in sequence. RESULTS: Phasic genioglossus activity was noted in four children at 1.5 MAC, five at 1.0 MAC, and six children at 0.5 MAC sevoflurane. Phasic palatoglossus activity was noted in 4 children at 1.5 MAC, 6 at 1.0 MAC, and 10 children at 0.5 MAC sevoflurane. Both the proportion of children exhibiting phasic activity, and the magnitude of phasic activity increased during recovery from anesthesia. For the genioglossus, decreasing the depth of sevoflurane anesthesia from 1.5 to 1.0 MAC increased phasic activity by approximately 35% and a further decrease to 0.5 MAC more than doubled activity (median [range] at 1.5 and 0.5 MAC: 2.7 μV [0 to 4.0 μV] and 8.6 μV [3.2 to 17.6], respectively; P = 0.029). A similar dose-related increase was recorded at the palatoglossus (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Genioglossus and palatoglossus activity increases during recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia in a dose-dependent manner over the clinical range of sevoflurane concentrations in children.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".