The Prolonged Duration of Rocuronium in Chinese Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared the potency and duration of action of rocuronium in Chinese and Caucasian patients during general anesthesia. Thirty-six women (18 Caucasian and 18 Chinese) and 36 children (18 Caucasian and 18 Chinese) were evaluated during the administration of propofol/fentanyl anesthesia. Patients in each age group were randomized into three subgroups to receive single doses of 0.06, 0. 12, or 0.18 mg/kg rocuronium (adults) or 0.12, 0.18, or 0.24 mg/kg rocuronium (children). Neuromuscular blockade was assessed by electromyography of the adductor pollicis after train-of-four (TOF) stimulation of the ulnar nerve. Dose response curves were constructed when maximum neuromuscular depression of the first twitch of the train (T(1)) was obtained. A second bolus dose of rocuronium was then administered to a total dose of 0.6 mg/kg. The times of spontaneous recovery to T(1) 10%, 25%, and 90% of control and to TOF 0.25, 0.50, and 0.70 were recorded. For both adults and children, recovery occurred later in Chinese than in Caucasian patients (P<0.05 for T(1) of 10%, 25%, 75%, and 90% and TOF to 0.7). The 50% effective dose was smaller in Chinese adults (125+/-63 vs. 159+/-66 microg/kg) and Chinese children (171+/-43 vs. 191+/-46 microg/kg) than in Caucasian adults and children, but the difference was not statistically significant. In adults, time to 25% T(1) recovery was 43+/-13 min in Chinese patients and 33+/-10 min in Caucasian patients (P<0.05). The corresponding values were more rapid for children: 30+/-10 and 24+/-6 min (P<0.05). We conclude that the recovery from rocuronium neuromuscular blockade was longer in Chinese compared with Caucasian patients and in adults compared with 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) | 0.000 | 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".