MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2882927263 · doi:10.2196/resprot.9277

Effects of Deep Versus Moderate Neuromuscular Blockade in Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery on Postoperative Pain and Surgical Conditions: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2018· article· en· W2882927263 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Edoardo De Robertis, Anna Caprino Miceli, Giorgio Lorenzo Colombo, Antonio Corcione, Yigal Leykin, Luigia Scudeller, Enrico Vizza, Paolo Scollo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Surgery and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialNeuromuscular BlockadeLaparoscopic surgeryProtocol (science)Postoperative painPhysical therapyLaparoscopySurgeryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnesthesiaGeneral surgeryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain, especially shoulder pain, is commonly reported after laparoscopic gynecologic procedures. Some studies suggest that a lower insufflation pressure may reduce the risk of postoperative pain; however, there is no agreement on the optimal pneumoperitoneum pressure during gynecologic laparoscopic surgery or whether lower pressure would lead to clinically significant improvements without increasing operative complications. Questions remain regarding the clinical significance of improvements, safety, and cost-effectiveness of deep neuromuscular blockade with low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to assess the superiority of anesthesia with deep neuromuscular blockade with pneumoperitoneum 8 mm Hg over moderate blockade with pneumoperitoneum 12 mm Hg in terms of overall pain 24 hours after surgery in adult women undergoing pelvic surgery for hysterectomy or benign adnexal diseases. Effects on the intensity and timing of postoperative pain in specific locations, surgeon satisfaction, respiratory and hemodynamic stability, operating times, and direct and indirect costs will be assessed. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized controlled trial with a superiority design, 300 patients will be randomly allocated in the ratio 1:1 to moderate neuromuscular blockade with a target insufflation pressure of 12 mm Hg or deep neuromuscular blockade with a target insufflation pressure of 8 mm Hg, with stratification by type of surgery and clinical center. The patient, the statistician, and the nurse who will assess the primary endpoint will be blinded to the allocation. RESULTS: Recruitment to this trial is expected to open in June 2018 and is expected to close in June 2019. CONCLUSIONS: This study is designed to confirm the reported benefits of postoperative pain and provide additional data needed to address questions regarding the effects of this intervention on operating theater management and direct and indirect costs. Strengths of this protocol include the large sample size distributed among diverse institutions across the Italian territory and the collection and analysis of data on numerous secondary objectives. Limitations include the possible introduction of bias because the surgeon and anesthesiologist are not blinded to the intervention. REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER: RR1-10.2196/9277.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.053
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.053
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.009
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0100.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.011

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicAbdominal Surgery and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207