MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2724550238 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000007322

Use of neuromuscular blockers and neostigmine for general anesthesia and its association with neuraxial blockade

2017· article· en· W2724550238 on OpenAlexaff
Filipe Nadir Caparica Santos, Angélica de Fátima de Assunção Braga, Fernando Eduardo Féres Junqueira, Rafaela Menezes Bezerra, Felipe Ferreira de Almeida, Franklin Sarmento da Silva Braga, Vanessa Henriques Carvalho

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsWomen's College Hospital
FundersUniversidade Estadual de Campinas
KeywordsMedicineNeostigmineAnesthesiaNeuraxial blockadeRocuroniumNeuromuscular BlockadeSugammadexBlockadeAnestheticPropofolInternal medicineSpinal anesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research aimed to assess the use of neuromuscular blockers (NMB) and its reversal, associated or not with neuraxial blockade, after general anesthesia.This retrospective study analyzed 1295 patients that underwent surgery with general anesthesia at Prof. Dr. José Aristodemo Pinotti Hospital in 2013. The study included patients aged >1 year, with complete, readable medical charts and anesthetic records.Rocuronium (ROC) was the most used NMB (96.7%), with an initial dose of 0.60 (0.52-0.74) mg/kg and total dose of 0.38 (0.27-0.53) mg/kg/h. In 24.3% of the cases, neuraxial blockade was associated with a significantly longer anesthesia (P < .001) than in cases without neuraxial block, regardless of technique (total intravenous (TIV) vs intravenous and inhalational (IV+IN)). In 71.9% of the cases, a single dose of NMB was used. Patients under TIV general anesthesia associated with neuraxial blockade had a lower total dose of ROC (mg/kg/h) in comparison with TIV GA alone (0.30 (0.23-0.39) and 0.42 (0.30-0.56) mg/kg/h, respectively, P < .001). The same was observed for patients under IV+IN GA (0.32 (0.23-0.41) and 0.43 (0.31-0.56) mg/kg/h, respectively, P < .001). The duration of anesthesia was longer according to increasing number of additional NMB doses (P < .001). Dose of neostigmine was 2.00 (2.00-2.00) mg or 29.41 (25.31-33.89) μg/kg. The interval between neostigmine and extubation was >30 minutes in 10.9% of cases.The most widely used NMB was ROC. Neuroaxial blockade (spinal or epidural) was significantly associated with reduced total dose of ROC (mg/kg/h) during general anesthesia, even in the absence of neuromuscular monitoring and regardless of general anesthetic technique chosen. In most cases, neostigmine was used to reverse neuromuscular block. The prolonged interval between neostigmine and extubation (>30 minutes) was neither associated with total doses of ROC or neostigmine, nor with the time of NMB administration. This study corroborates the important role of quantitative neuromuscular monitors and demonstrates that neuraxial blockade is associated with reduced total ROC dose. Further studies are needed to evaluate the possible role of neuraxial blockade in reducing the incidence of postoperative residual curarization.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207