MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939845815 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000004135

Effects of Dexmedetomidine on Myocardial Repolarization in Children Undergoing General Anesthesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2019· article· en· W2939845815 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Görges, Elizabeth D. Sherwin, Andrew K. Poznikoff, Nicholas West, Sonia M. Brodie, Simon D. Whyte

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDexmedetomidineAnesthesiaQT intervalTorsades de pointesRepolarizationHeart rateBolus (digestion)Confidence intervalElectrocardiographyInternal medicineBlood pressureSedationElectrophysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α2-adrenergic agonist, which is increasingly used in pediatric anesthesia and intensive care. Potential adverse effects that have not been rigorously evaluated in children include its effects on myocardial repolarization, which is important given that the drug is listed as a possible risk factor for torsades de pointes. We investigated the effect of 3 different doses of dexmedetomidine on myocardial repolarization and transmural dispersion in children undergoing elective surgery with total IV anesthesia. METHODS: Sixty-four American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II children 3-10 years of age were randomized to receive dexmedetomidine 0.25 µg/kg, 0.5 µg/kg, 0.75 µg/kg, or 0 µg/kg (control), as a bolus administered over 60 seconds, after induction of anesthesia. Pre- and postintervention 12-lead electrocardiograms were recorded. The interval between the peak and the end of the electrocardiogram T wave (Tp-e; transmural dispersion) and heart rate-corrected QT intervals (myocardial repolarization) were measured by a pediatric electrophysiologist blinded to group allocation. Data were analyzed using an analysis of covariance regression model. The study was powered to detect a 25-millisecond difference in Tp-e. RESULTS: Forty-eight children completed the study, with data analyzed from 12 participants per group. There were no instances of dysrhythmias. Tp-e values were unaffected by dexmedetomidine administration at any of the studied doses (F = 0.09; P = .96). Mean (99% CI) within-group differences were all <2 milliseconds (-5 to 8). Postintervention, corrected QT interval increased in the control group, but decreased in some dexmedetomidine groups (F = 7.23; P < .001), specifically the dexmedetomidine 0.5 and 0.75 µg/kg doses. Within groups, the mean (99% CI) differences between pre- and postintervention corrected QT interval were 12.4 milliseconds (-5.8 to 30.6) in the control group, -9.0 milliseconds (-24.9 to 6.9) for dexmedetomidine 0.25 µg/kg, -18.6 milliseconds (-33.7 to -3.5) for dexmedetomidine 0.5 µg/kg, and -14.1 milliseconds (-27.4 to -0.8) for dexmedetomidine 0.75 µg/kg. CONCLUSIONS: Of the bolus doses of dexmedetomidine studied, none had an effect on Tp-e and the dexmedetomidine 0.5 and 0.75 µg/kg doses shortened corrected QT intervals when measured at 1 minute after dexmedetomidine bolus injection during total IV anesthesia. There is no evidence for an increased risk of torsades de pointes in this context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207