MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220720592 · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000004199

Referral Indications for Malignant Hyperthermia Susceptibility Diagnostics in Patients without Adverse Anesthetic Events in the Era of Next-generation Sequencing

2022· article· en· W4220720592 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicIon channel regulation and function
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalignant hyperthermiaReferralAdverse effectAnestheticComplication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The introduction of next-generation sequencing into the diagnosis of neuromuscular disorders has resulted in an increased number of newly identified RYR1 variants. The hypothesis was that there is an increased referral of patients to malignant hyperthermia units without a personal/family history of adverse anesthetic events suspected to be malignant hyperthermia. This retrospective multicenter cohort study evaluates patient referral indications and outcomes for those without a history of an adverse anesthetic event. METHODS: Patients referred between 2010 and 2019 to the malignant hyperthermia units in Antwerp, Belgium; Lund, Sweden; Nijmegen, The Netherlands; and Toronto, Ontario, Canada were included. Previously tested patients and relatives of previously tested patients were excluded. Data collection included demographics, referral details, muscle contracture, and genetic testing results including Rare Exome Variant Ensemble Learner scores. Referral indications were categorized into those with a personal/family history of adverse anesthetic event and other indications including exertional and/or recurrent rhabdomyolysis, RYR1 variant(s) detected in diagnostic testing in the neuromuscular clinic without a specific diagnosis (in a family member), diagnosed RYR1-related myopathy (in a family member), idiopathically elevated resting creatine kinase values, exertional heat stroke, and other. RESULTS: A total of 520 medical records were included, with the three most frequent referral indications as follows: personal history of an adverse anesthetic event (211 of 520; 40.6%), family history of an adverse anesthetic event (115 of 520; 22.1%), and exertional and/or recurrent rhabdomyolysis (46 of 520; 8.8%). The proportion of patients referred without a personal/family history of an adverse anesthetic event increased to 43.6% (133 of 305) between 2015 and 2019 compared to 28.4% (61 of 215) in 2010 to 2014 (P < 0.001). Patients with a personal/family history of an adverse anesthetic event were more frequently diagnosed as malignant hyperthermia-susceptible (133 of 220; 60.5%) than those without (47 of 120; 39.2%; P < 0.001). Due to missing data, 180 medical records were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of patients referred to malignant hyperthermia units without a personal/family history of an adverse anesthetic event has increased, with 39.2% (47 of 120) diagnosed as malignant hyperthermia-susceptible.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.263
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

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 designObservational
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicIon channel regulation and functionFrench-language works237,207