Effects of different depths of sedation on postoperative cognitive function in elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the effects of different depths of sedation on postoperative cognitive function in elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment. Methods A total of 100 patients with mild cognitive impairment before surgery, aged 65-75 yr, weighing 55-75 kg, of American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status Ⅱ or Ⅲ, scheduled for elective gynecological surgery under general anesthesia, were divided into Ⅰ and Ⅱ groups (n=50 each) using a random number table method.Propofol was given by closed-loop target-controlled infusion, and the target plasma concentration was automatically regulated.The bispectral index value was maintained at 40-50 in group Ⅰand at>50-60 in group Ⅱ.Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used to evaluate the cognitive function at 1 day before operation (T0) and 7 days after operation (T1), and the development of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) was recorded.Venous blood samples were collected at T0 and T1 for determination of the concentrations of serum interleukin-10 (IL-10) and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Results Compared with the baseline value at T0, MoCA and MMSE scores were significantly decreased at T1, and the serum concentrations of IL-10 and TNF-α were increased in both groups (P<0.05). Compared with group Ⅰ, MoCA and MMSE scores were significantly decreased at T1, and the incidence of POCD was increased, the serum concentration of TNF-α was increased, and the serum concentration of IL-10 was decreased in groupⅡ(P<0.05). Conclusion Maintaining BIS value at 40-50 during operation can decrease the development of POCD in elderly patients with mild cognitive impairment, which may be related to reduced systemic inflammatory responses. Key words: Electroencephalography; Cognition dissorders; Aged
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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; 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".