Postoperative Analgesia Provided by Liposomal Hydromorphone in Client-Owned Dogs Undergoing Limb Amputation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The analgesic efficacy of liposomal hydromorphone (LE-hydro) was tested in dogs undergoing limb amputation. The positive controls (n = 10) received subcutaneous (SQ) hydromorphone (0.2 mg/kg) and 1.5 mL of blank liposomes before surgery; fentanyl continuous rate infusion (CRI), 5-10 μg/kg/hr IV, during and for 24 hr after surgery; and a fentanyl patch at extubation. The negative controls (n = 7) received SQ hydromorphone (0.2 mg/kg) and 1.5 mLs of blank liposomes SQ before surgery, fentanyl CRI (5-10 μg/kg/hr IV) during surgery but stopped at extubation, and a fentanyl patch at extubation. The test group (n = 11) received 3 mg/kg of LE-hydro and 1.5 mL of saline SQ before surgery, 1.5 mL of saline SQ, and a saline CRI during surgery. All groups received a bupivacaine block in the limb prior to amputation and carprofen prior to surgery. Treatment failures, pain scores, opioid side effects, heart rate, respiratory rate, temperature, and client-reported pain and side effects were evaluated. There were three treatment failures in the positive control (3/10) and test groups (3/11). Negative controls had seven treatment failures (7/7). Side effects for all three groups were within expected limits. LE-hydro provides postoperative analgesia equivalent to fentanyl CRI in dogs undergoing limb amputation.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".