The effect of Dexmedetomidine on the incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction in elderly patients after prolonged abdominal surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundPostoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) in elderly patients is a common complaint after prolonged surgeries. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the effect of intraoperative infusion of Dexmedetomidine on POCD.Methods50 patients aged more than 60 years old undergoing elective abdominal surgery expected to last more than 2 hours were randomized into 2 groups of 25 patients each: those receiving Dexmedetomidine at a dose of 0.4 μg/kg/h, group (A) and those receiving 0.9% normal saline as placebo group (B). All patients underwent neuropsychometric tests (Montreal cognitive assessment and Stroop color word interference tests) the day before the surgery and 24 h after the surgery, and one week postoperatively.ResultsThe use of Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant during Sevoflurane anesthesia did not have significant effect on protection against POCD in one day and one week postoperatively. The anesthetic and analgesic sparing effect of Dexmedetomidine was significantly proved by lower Sevoflurane need and significant lesser amount of total 24 hours postoperative Fentanyl requirements, but with significant prolonged extubation and orientation times in Dexmedetomidine group than placebo group.ConclusionsThe findings of this pilot study suggest that intraoperative use of Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant in major surgery in elderly patients was not associated with significant protection against POCD.
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) | 0.000 | 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".