MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Benefits of dexmedetomidine on postoperative analgesia after bariatric surgery

2021· article· en· W3208198775 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerva Anestesiologica · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkWomen's College HospitalMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDexmedetomidineAnalgesicAdjunctPostoperative painSurgical procedures

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Anesthetic management of morbidly obese patients is challenging, particularly in those undergoing bariatric surgery. Dexmedetomidine is a α<inf>2</inf>-adrenergic receptor agonist that is increasingly used in the perioperative setting for its beneficial properties including sedation, anxiolysis, analgesia with opioid-sparing effects, and minimal impact on respiration. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of dexmedetomidine on postoperative analgesia and recovery-related outcomes among patients undergoing bariatric surgery. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases from conception to September 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using dexmedetomidine in bariatric patients on postoperative outcomes. Outcomes were pooled using random effects model and presented as relative risks (RR) or mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In total, 20 RCTs with 665 patients in the dexmedetomidine group and 671 patients in the control groups were included. Among RCTs, the dexmedetomidine group had significantly lower opioid usage at 24-hours postoperatively (MD: -5.14, 95% CI: -10.18 to -0.10; moderate certainty), reduced pain scores on a 10-point scale at PACU arrival (MD: -1.69, 95% CI: -2.79 to -0.59; moderate certainty) and six hours postoperatively (MD: -1.82, 95% CI: -3.00 to -0.64; low certainty), and fewer instances of nausea (RR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.75; moderate certainty) and vomiting (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.43; moderate certainty), compared to control groups. CONCLUSIONS: Dexmedetomidine is an efficacious anesthesia adjunct in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. These benefits of dexmedetomidine may be considered in the multi-modal analgesic management and enhanced recovery pathways in this high-risk population.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designlow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.900

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Other design
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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinerva AnestesiologicaSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207