The cardiac anesthetic index of isoflurane in green iguanas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the cardiac anesthetic index (CAI) of isoflurane in green iguanas and whether butorphanol affected the CAI. DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. ANIMALS: 7 healthy mature iguanas. PROCEDURE: In 5 iguanas, CAI was determined after induction of anesthesia with isoflurane alone, and in 5 iguanas, CAI was determined after induction of anesthesia with isoflurane and IM administration of butorphanol (1 mg/kg [0.45 mg/lb]). Three iguanas underwent both treatments. Animals were equilibrated for 20 minutes at 1.5 times the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of isoflurane and observed for evidence of cardiovascular arrest. If there was no evidence of cardiovascular arrest, end-tidal isoflurane concentration was increased by 20%, and animals were allowed to equilibrate for another 20 minutes. This process was repeated until cardiovascular arrest occurred or vaporizer output could no longer be consistently increased. The CAI was calculated by dividing the highest end-tidal isoflurane concentration by the MAC. RESULTS: None of the iguanas developed cardiovascular arrest and all survived. Mean +/- SD highest end-tidal isoflurane concentration during anesthesia with isoflurane alone (9.2 +/- 0.60%) was not significantly different from mean concentration during anesthesia with isoflurane and butorphanol (9.0 +/- 0.43%). The CAI was > 4.32. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results suggest that the CAI of isoflurane in green iguanas is > 4.32 and not affected by administration of butorphanol. Isoflurane appears to be a safe anesthetic in green iguanas.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".