Efficacy and safety of caudal injection of levobupivacaine, 0.25%, in children under 2 years of age undergoing inguinal hernia repair, circumcision or orchidopexy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Levobupivacaine is the S(-)-enantiomer of racemic bupivacaine. Evidence suggests that it is less cardiotoxic than racemic bupivacaine and the R(+)-enantiomer, dexbupivacaine, while retaining similar local anaesthetic properties and potency to racemic bupivacaine. METHODS: This was an open study designed to assess the efficacy and safety of 0.25% levobupivacaine administered as a caudal injection at a dose of 2 mg.kg(-1) to 49 paediatric patients aged less than 2 years old undergoing circumcision (group 1), or hernia repair or orchidopexy (group 2). RESULTS: Adequate analgesia (an increase of <20% in pulse or respiratory rate compared with baseline and an absence of gross movement on application of surgical stimulus) was achieved in 43/48 patients evaluable for efficacy (89.6%). All 22 patients in the circumcision group had adequate analgesia, and two of these patients did not require additional analgesia. The mean time to the use of additional analgesia was 7.3 h. Only one event (a mild rash) was considered possibly related to study medication. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine is a promising new local anaesthetic agent for pain management in paediatric patients and appears to offer similar anaesthetic efficacy to racemic bupivacaine with a potentially improved tolerability profile.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".