European Neuromuscular Centre consensus statement on anaesthesia in patients with neuromuscular disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with neuromuscular conditions are at increased risk of suffering perioperative complications related to anaesthesia. There is currently little specific anaesthetic guidance concerning these patients. Here, we present the European Neuromuscular Centre (ENMC) consensus statement on anaesthesia in patients with neuromuscular disorders as formulated during the 259th ENMC Workshop on Anaesthesia in Neuromuscular Disorders. METHODS: International experts in the field of (paediatric) anaesthesia, neurology, and genetics were invited to participate in the ENMC workshop. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, the main findings of which were disseminated to the participants and presented during the workshop. Depending on specific expertise, participants presented the existing evidence and their expert opinion concerning anaesthetic management in six specific groups of myopathies and neuromuscular junction disorders. The consensus statement was prepared according to the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation) reporting checklist. The level of evidence has been adapted according to the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) grading system. The final consensus statement was subjected to a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: A set of general recommendations valid for the anaesthetic management of patients with neuromuscular disorders in general have been formulated. Specific recommendations were formulated for (i) neuromuscular junction disorders, (ii) muscle channelopathies (nondystrophic myotonia and periodic paralysis), (iii) myotonic dystrophy (types 1 and 2), (iv) muscular dystrophies, (v) congenital myopathies and congenital dystrophies, and (vi) mitochondrial and metabolic myopathies. CONCLUSIONS: This ENMC consensus statement summarizes the most important considerations for planning and performing anaesthesia in patients with neuromuscular disorders.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".