Does ketamine affect intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring in children undergoing selective posterior rhizotomy?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Direct dorsal rootlet stimulation with intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring is an adjunct to clinical evaluation during selective posterior rhizotomy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of ketamine on intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring during selective posterior rhizotomy. Specifically, we sought to determine if low dose ketamine given as part of the anesthesia was associated with changes in intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring in patients who underwent selective posterior rhizotomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using anesthetic records and electrophysiological records of 32 children who had intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring during selective posterior rhizotomy under general anesthesia. Administration and dosage of ketamine preceding the stimulation of dorsal roots was determined from the anesthetic record. A pediatric neurologist, blinded to patient, and to ketamine exposure, evaluated different electrophysiological criteria. RESULTS: Eight children received ketamine and 24 did not receive it. The mean average dose of ketamine was 0.18 mg x kg(-1) (sd: 0.04). We did not find any statistically significant difference in intraoperative electrophysiological response between the ketamine and the control groups. However, we noted some trends: Administration of ketamine preceding the stimulation of dorsal roots was associated with a lower maximal threshold (2.7 mA vs 3.5 mA, P = 0.663) and root thresholds compared with children who did not receive ketamine. In addition, the train response following delivery of the suprastimulation tended to last longer with the presence of ketamine. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of low dose ketamine preceding the stimulation of dorsal roots during selective posterior rhizotomy might be associated with lower maximal thresholds and a more sustained train response following stimulation. Physicians should be aware of this finding in order to avoid misinterpreting intraoperative electrophysiological monitoring.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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".