The nociception level index (NOL) response to intubation and incision in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) with and without thoracic epidural analgesia. A pilot study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The PMD100™ (Medasense Biometrics Ltd., Ramat Yishai, Israel) is a novel non-invasive nociception monitor that integrates physiological parameters to compute a real-time nociception level index (NOL) in the anesthetized patients. Thoracic epidural analgesia provides effective analgesia and improves surgical outcomes. Side effects include sympathectomy, hypotension, changes in skin temperature and a decreased cardiac accelerator fiber tone. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate changes in NOL values after incision in patients with and without epidural analgesia. Methods: Half of the patients scheduled for Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery (VATS) received a thoracic epidural catheter, placed and tested 2h before surgery and activated prior to incision. The other half of the patients received i.v. fentanyl (1 mcg/kg) five minutes before incision. Anesthesia and analgesia were maintained in a standardized manner. NOL and heart rate (HR) were compared before and after the nociceptive stimuli intubation and skin incision. Results: NOL significantly increased in all patients after intubation by 10.2 points (CI: 4.5-16.0; p=0.002) as well as HR by 9 beats per minute after intubation in all patients (CI: 3.3-15.6; p=0.01). After incision, in patients without epidural analgesia the NOL increased by 13.9 points (CI: 7.4-20.3; p=0.0001), compared to 5.4 points (CI: -6.3-17.1; p=0.29) in patients with epidural analgesia. HR did not significantly vary after incision in both groups. The area under the curve of delta NOL and delta HR variations after incision were significantly different (p<0.05) between groups and delta NOL variations were significantly different from baseline values but not the delta HR variations. Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that the PMD100™ Monitor may be a useful tool to evaluate the efficacy of an intraoperative thoracic epidural analgesia. Clinical Trial Registry Number : ClinicalTrials.gov record ID: NCT01978379 registered 10/25/2014.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".