Effect of desflurane/remifentanil anaesthesia on glucose metabolism during surgery: a comparison with desflurane/epidural anaesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of general anaesthesia combined with remifentanil or epidural blockade on glucose metabolism during surgery. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery to receive either desflurane anaesthesia supplemented with intravenous remifentanil (n = 7) or desflurane anaesthesia supplemented with epidural bupivacaine (n = 7). Plasma concentrations of glucose, lactate, free fatty acids (FFA), insulin, glucagon and cortisol were measured before and after 2 h of surgery. Pre- and intraoperative whole body glucose production and glucose clearance, an indicator of glucose uptake, were determined by an isotope dilution technique using [6,6-2H2]glucose. RESULTS: In both groups intraoperative glucose production ( P< 0.05) and uptake ( P< 0.05) decreased. Plasma glucose concentrations ( P< 0.05) increased during surgery but did not exceed the normal range (remifentanil group: 5.7 +/- 0.7 mmol l-1, epidural group: 5.8 +/- 0.4 mmol l-1). The plasma concentrations of lactate, FFA, insulin and glucagon remained unchanged during the operation. The plasma cortisol concentration in both groups increased intraoperatively (P< 0.05). CONCLUSION: Both desflurane/remifentanil and desflurane/epidural anaesthesia decrease the intraoperative rate of whole body glucose production, thereby attenuating the hyperglycaemic response to colorectal surgery.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".