General Anesthesia With Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil in a 3-Year-Old Child: An Alternative Anesthetic Regimen to Allay Parental Concerns of the Potential Neurocognitive Effects of General Anesthesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent attention has been focused on the potential neurocognitive effects of general anesthesia during infancy and early life. Although the exact implications of this effect have yet to be proven, media attention has been raised and parents may be aware of such problems, thereby questioning the safety of general anesthesia. Although spinal and regional anesthetic techniques have seen an increased use in an attempt to eliminate the concerns of such problems, many surgical procedures may not be amenable to regional anesthesia. We present a 3-year-old boy who presented for excision of an enlarging cyst on his left ear. During the preoperative visit with the surgeon, the patient’s mother voiced concerns regarding the potential neurocognitive effects of general anesthesia. General anesthesia was provided using a combination of dexmedetomidine and remifentanil. Previous reports of the use of this unique combination of agents are reviewed and its role in this scenario was discussed. J Med Cases. 2016;7(3):109-113 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc2453w
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".