MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146799892 · doi:10.1017/s0265021507002608

Myocardial protection by isoflurane vs. sevoflurane in ultra-fast-track anaesthesia for off-pump aortocoronary bypass grafting

2007· article· en· W2146799892 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas M. Hemmerling, J Olivier, Ngoc‐Anh Le, Ignatio Prieto, David Bracco

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsHôtel-Dieu de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIsofluraneSevofluraneAnesthesiaFast trackBypass graftingCardiologySurgeryArtery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Volatile anaesthetics have gained more popularity recently due to the potential for cardiac protection. Ultra-fast-track anaesthesia implies the immediate extubation after cardiac surgery. The purpose of this prospective randomized double-blind controlled study is to compare the cardioprotective effects of sevoflurane and isoflurane in off-pump cardiac bypass surgery. METHODS: Forty patients undergoing elective off-pump cardiac bypass surgery with high thoracic epidural analgesia and immediate extubation at the end of surgery were randomized into two groups. During surgery, anaesthesia was provided with either 1 minimum alvelolar anaesthetic concentration of sevoflurane or 1 minimum alvelolar anaesthetic concentration of isoflurane. Troponin-T, creatine kinase-MB, left ventricular wall motion anomalies, time to extubation, respiratory functions and haemodynamic parameters were compared between the two groups by analysis of variance. RESULTS: All patients were successfully extubated in the operating theatre with minimal postoperative pain. Serial creatine kinase-MB and troponin-T concentrations were not significantly different between the two volatile agents. Haemodynamic stability throughout surgery and contractility was not different between groups. However, extubation time was significantly shorter with sevoflurane (10 +/- 5 min) compared to isoflurane (18 +/- 4 min). CONCLUSION: This study indicates that during off-pump cardiac bypass surgery, sevoflurane and isoflurane provide the same ischaemic cardioprotective effects. There is no difference for heart contractility and haemodynamic values during and after off-pump cardiac bypass surgery between the two agents. Sevoflurane allows a more rapid recovery from anaesthesia, but this does not translate into better pulmonary function or haemodynamics. Both agents are similar in ultra-fast-track off-pump cardiac bypass 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicCardiac and Coronary Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207