Epidural Blockade Modifies Perioperative Glucose Production without Affecting Protein Catabolism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidural blockade with local anesthetic has been shown to blunt the increase in plasma glucose concentration during and after abdominal surgery. The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that epidural blockade inhibits this hyperglycemic response by attenuating endogenous glucose production. The authors further examined if the modification of glucose production by epidural blockade has an impact on perioperative protein catabolism. METHODS: Sixteen patients undergoing colorectal surgery received either general anesthesia and epidural blockade with local anesthetic (n = 8) or general anesthesia alone (control, n = 8). Glucose and protein kinetics were assessed by stable isotope tracer technique ([6,6-2H2]glucose, L-[1-13C]leucine) during and 2 h after surgery. Plasma concentrations of glucose, lactate, free fatty acids (FFA), cortisol, glucagon, and insulin were also determined. RESULTS: Epidural blockade blunted the perioperative increase in the plasma concentration of glucose, cortisol, and glucagon when compared with the control group (P < 0.05). Plasma concentrations of lactate, FFA, and insulin did not change. Intra- and postoperative glucose production was lower in patients with epidural blockade than in control subjects (intraoperative, epidural blockade 8.2 +/- 1.9 vs. control 10.7 +/- 1.4 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1), P < 0.05; postoperative, epidural blockade 8.5 +/- 1.8 vs. control 10.5 +/- 1.2 micromol x kg(-1) x min(-1), P < 0.05), whereas glucose clearance decreased to a comparable extent in both groups (P < 0.05). Protein breakdown (P < 0.05), protein synthesis (P < 0.05), and amino acid oxidation (P > 0.05) decreased with both anesthetic techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Epidural blockade attenuates the hyperglycemic response to surgery through modification of glucose production. The perioperative suppression of protein metabolism was not influenced by epidural blockade.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".