Pupillary reflex dilation and skin temperature to assess sensory level during combined general and caudal anesthesia in children*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Regional anesthesia causes sympathetic blockade, vasodilation and higher skin temperature in anesthetized dermatomes. Measurement of skin temperature changes might provide a useful estimate of the level of caudal anesthesia in children. Pupillary reflex dilation (PRD) allows estimation of the sensory level during combined general/epidural anesthesia in adults, but has not been assessed in children. This study was designed to evaluate skin temperature and PRD as methods of estimating sensory level in children receiving combined general/caudal epidural anesthesia. METHODS: Twenty ASA I and II children aged 10 months-5 years were enrolled. Anesthesia was induced with sevoflurane and N2O in O2 and maintained with 1 MAC isoflurane and air in O2. Caudal epidural anesthesia was achieved by injection of 1 ml x kg(-1) 0.25% bupivacaine. Skin temperature was measured by rapid response infrared thermometry. PRD was measured using an ophthalmic ultrasound biomicroscope (UBM). The three criteria used to estimate sensory level were a drop in skin temperature of 0.5 degrees C between dermatomes, PRD of 50% and PRD of 0.2 mm. RESULTS: A drop in skin temperature of 0.5 degrees C between dermatomes allowed estimation of the sensory level in only 20% of patients. PRD of 50%, and PRD of 0.2 mm allowed estimation of the sensory level in 45 and 100% of patients, respectively. PRD was significantly greater above the T10 dermatome compared with L2 (P < 0.01). The maximum pupillary dilation was significantly greater in children over 2 years of age [1.3 +/- 0.8 mm sd)] compared with children less than two years of age [0.6 +/- 0.3 mm sd)]. CONCLUSIONS: Skin temperature cannot be used to estimate sensory level during combined general/caudal epidural anesthesia. PRD of 0.2 mm is sensitive to the loss of analgesia but is not clinically useful. PRD may be useful above 2 years of age.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".