MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dexmedetomidine: a safe alternative to general anesthesia for endovascular stroke treatment

2013· article· en· W2088533402 on OpenAlex
Matthew K. Whalin, Susan Lopian, Katleen Wyatt, Chung‐Huan Sun, Raul G. Nogueira, Brenda A Glenn, Raphael Y. Gershon, Rishi Gupta

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NeuroInterventional Surgery · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDexmedetomidineSedationStroke (engine)AnesthesiaBlood pressureModified Rankin ScaleLogistic regressionSedativeHemodynamicsDepression (economics)Internal medicineIschemic stroke

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There have been reports that general anesthesia (GA) is associated with worse clinical outcomes during intra-arterial treatment (IAT) for stroke. Since traditional sedatives carry the risk of respiratory depression, this retrospective study was designed to compare sedation with the α2 adrenergic agonist dexmedetomidine (DEX) and with GA for IAT procedures. METHODS: We reviewed our institutional endovascular database of 216 consecutive patients who received DEX or GA for IAT of anterior circulation strokes between September 2010 and July 2012. The demographic, radiographic and angiographic variables between the GA and DEX groups were compared, as well as hemodynamic changes during the procedure. Binary logistic regression models were generated to determine the independent predictors of a favorable outcome (defined as a modified Rankin Score at 90 days of 0-2). RESULTS: 83 patients had IAT performed under DEX sedation. Their demographic characteristics were similar to those given GA except that they were older and had less severe strokes. The GA group experienced greater variations in blood pressure, more hypotension with induction (54% vs 28%, p<0.001) and greater use of vasopressors (79% vs 58%, p<0.001). In our regression models, independent predictors of a good outcome included age, NIH Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, Alberta Stroke Program Early CT score (ASPECTS), successful reperfusion, lower baseline systolic blood pressure and higher blood pressures during the procedure. DEX was associated with a good outcome when models included NIHSS as the sole measure of stroke severity but was equivalent to GA when ASPECTS was added to the analysis. CONCLUSIONS: DEX can be safely administered in patients undergoing endovascular reperfusion therapies. Further study is required to determine if outcomes are different among sedatives used during such procedures.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it