Efficacy of an intercostal nerve block administered with general anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing distal gastrectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of administration of an intercostal nerve block (INB) with general anesthesia to elderly patients undergoing a distal gastrectomy. METHODS: Elderly patients (>65 years) undergoing selective gastrectomy were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 80): general anesthesia (Group A); general + INB anesthesia (Group B); or, general + epidural anesthesia (Group C). General anesthesia was maintained with propofol, remifentanil and cisatracurium. The mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were determined before anesthesia (T0) and at 5 min after intubation (T1), skin incision (T2), exploration of the peritoneal cavity (T3), gastrointestinal anastomosis (T4), end of operation (T5) and 10 min after extubation (T6). RESULTS: MAP decreased at T1 in all groups (P < 0.05) and at T2, T4 and T5 in Group C (P < 0.05) and was lower in Group C than Group B at T2 and T4 (P < 0.05). There were no differences in MAP between Groups A and B or between Groups B and C. HR increased at T2-T6 in Group A (P < 0.05) and was higher at T2-T6 in Group B and Group C (P < 0.05). CRP levels decreased at T2-T5 in Groups B and C (P < 0.05) and were lower in Groups B and C compared with Group A (P < 0.05). Propofol and remifentanil doses were lower in Groups B and C (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively) and patients recovered faster than in Group A (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Administration of INB with general anesthesia enhanced analgesia, led to stable hemodynamics, and reduced anaesthetic consumption and postoperative stress response.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.004 |
| 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".