Safety and Efficacy of Propranolol in Comparison With Combination of Fentanyl and Ketamine as Premedication in Cataract Surgery Under the Topical Anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study evaluated the safety and effects of propranolol as a premedication before cataract surgery and compared them with the usual combination doses of fentanyl and ketamine. Among all reffered patients to Feiz Hospital of Esfahan for cataract surgery, 122 patients between Mar to Sep 2010 were enrolled in this study and randomly allocated into one of the following equal groups: 40 mg propranolol, 2 hours before surgery and combination of 15 mg ketamine and 50 µg fentanyl l. 5 min before surgery. The ability to control of hemodynamic instabilities caused by stress and to gain patients satisfaction was compared between two groups. Also, the efficacy of each premedication to control of hemodynamic changes during surgery were evaluated and compared. No significant differences were seen in the patients satisfaction and controlling of stress induced hemodynamic changes between two groups (P>0.05). However, patients in ketamine + fentanyl group showed more nausea and less pain during and after surgery. Moreover, no significant adverse effects were reported during and after the surgery. Our results demonstrated that propranolol can be used safely as a premedication in cataract surgery in the comparable efficacy to ketamine plus fentanyl premedication.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".