Propofol as a Risk Factor for ICU-Acquired Weakness in Septic Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Critical illness polyneuropathy (CIN) and critical illness myopathy (CIM), together "ICU-Acquired weakness (ICUAW)," occur frequently in septic patients. One of the proposed mechanisms for ICUAW includes prolonged inactivation of sodium channels. Propofol, used commonly in patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF), primarily acts via enhancement of GABAergic transmission but may also increase sodium channel inactivation, suggesting a potential interaction. METHODS: Electronic medical records and EMG reports of patients with ICUAW and a diagnosis of either sepsis, septicaemia, severe sepsis, or septic shock, concurrent with a diagnosis of acute respiratory failure (ARF), were retrospectively analyzed in a single center university hospital. RESULTS: 74 cases were identified (50.0% men, age 58±14 years), and compared to age- and sex-matched controls. Of these, 51 (69%) had CIN, 19 (26%) had CIM, and 4 (5%) had both. Propofol exposure was significantly higher in patients with ICUAW compared to controls (63.5% vs. 33.8%, p<0.001). The odds ratio of developing ICUAW with propofol exposure was 3.4 (95% CI:1.7-6.7, p<0.001). Patients with ICUAW had significantly more days in hospital (59±44 vs. 30±23) and ICU (38±26 vs. 17±13), days dependent on mechanical ventilation (27±21 vs. 13±16), and rates of tracheostomy (79.7% vs. 36.5%) and gastrostomy (75.7% vs. 25.7%) (all p<0.001). They also received a significantly higher number of distinct intravenous antibiotics, cumulative days of antibiotic therapy, and exposure to vasopressors and paralytics. CONCLUSIONS: Propofol exposure may increase the risk of ICUAW in septic patients. An interaction through sodium channel inactivation is hypothesized.
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 | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".