Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of a 0.1 mg/kg Dose of Cisatracurium Besylate in Children During N2O/O2/Propofol Anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief We studied the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of cisatracurium in 9 children (mean weight, 17.1 kg) aged 1–6 yr (mean, 3.75 yr) during propofol-nitrous oxide anesthesia. Neuromuscular monitoring was performed. Venous samples were taken before injection of a 0.1 mg/kg dose of cisatracurium and then at 2, 5, 10, 30, 60, 90, and 120 min. Cisatracurium plasma concentrations were determined by high performance liquid chromatography. Onset time was 2.5 ± 0.8 min, recovery to 25% of baseline twitch height was 37.6 ± 10.2 min, and the 25%–75% recovery index was 10.9 ± 3.7 min. Distribution and elimination half-lives were 3.5 ± 0.9 min and 22.9 ± 4.5 min, respectively. Steady-state volume of distribution (0.207 ± 0.031 L/kg) and total body clearance (6.8 ± 0.7 mL/min/kg) were significantly larger than those published for adults. Pharmacodynamic results were comparable to those obtained in pediatric studies during halothane or opioid anesthesia with the exception of a longer recovery to 25% baseline. Although the plasma-effect compartment equilibration rate constant was twofold faster (0.115 ± 0.025 min−1) than that published for cisatracurium in adults, the effect compartment concentration corresponding to 50% block was similar (129 ± 27 ng/mL). IMPLICATIONS: Cisatracurium was shown to provide safe muscle relaxation in children 1-6 yr old during propofol anesthesia by studying cisatracurium blood levels and depth of paralysis. Differences in pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics from adults highlight the need for pediatric studies to guide dosing and predict duration of action 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".