MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4230456179 · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e3181a5e1c7

Intracarotid Etomidate

2009· letter· en· W4230456179 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lashmi Venkatraghavan, Anna Perks

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2009
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEtomidateMedicineAnesthesiaPropofol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We read with great interest the review by Dr. Joshi et al. on intracarotid delivery of drugs.1In spite of recent advances in functional magnetic resonance imaging, the Wada test is still an important test for presurgical evaluation of patients with epilepsy.2The intracarotid sodium amytal test (Wada test) has been used to lateralize cerebral dominance for speech and to evaluate memory in each hemisphere.3Anesthesiologists are generally not involved in this procedure. In some centers, an anesthesiologist is on stand-by during the procedure to manage potential complications, namely stroke.In the article by Dr. Joshi et al., there is mention that baseline sedation provided by the anesthesiologist in attendance would further complicate the interpretation of the Wada test and also suggests use of a judicious amount of sedation during the procedure. We disagree with the suggestion by the authors for the use of sedation during the procedure. These tests are done for evaluation of memory and language with unilateral intracarotid injection of drugs. Any sedation during the procedure will interfere with the memory testing.4As a result of the recurrent shortages in the availability of sodium amytal, other agents are being used for Wada testing. As mentioned in the article, propofol or methohexitone have been used with limited success.5Jones-Gotman et al. have published their work in the use of etomidate for the Wada test.6They have shown that etomidate is a viable alternative to sodium amytal, and its administration by bolus followed by infusion offers an improvement over the traditional Wada test. It is given as a 2-mg initial bolus (0.03-0.04 mg/kg) over 30 to 60 s, then an infusion of 0.003 to 0.004 mg/kg/min (approximately 6 ml/h neat etomidate 2 mg/ml) until the speech assessment and memory objects have been introduced. Many centers in the world are now switching to this etomidate speech and memory test. Manufacturer’s recommendations mandate an anesthesiologist to administer etomidate, so many anesthesiologists are now involved.7In our institution, we have been using etomidate for the Wada test for the past year with great success. In addition, bilateral injection is our standard practice. The second injection is made only after the confirmation of complete clearance of the drug effects (both clinically and electroencephalographically).*Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. lashmi.venkatraghavan@uhn.on.ca

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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207