Effects of Peripheral Neural Blocks in Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Pilot Study on Cognitive Functions in Severe Obese Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In addition to the analgesic effect, peripheral neural blocks also prevent cognitive impairment and peripheral inflammation induced by surgery. However, it is unknown if there is collateral impact on cognitive improvement after bariatric surgery. METHODS: In this pilot study, 75 patients with severe obesity for selective laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) were recruited and randomized into three groups (1:1:1) as general anesthesia (GA) group, transverse abdominis plane block (TAPB) group, and quadratus lumborum block (QLB) group. Bilateral TAPB or QLB was performed (0.33% ropivacaine with dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg) before the standardized general anesthesia. Cognitive test battery was completed before LSG and in 1-month and 3-month follow-up. The levels of peripheral inflammatory cytokines were determined at equivalent time points. RESULTS: < 0.001). Compared to GA, QLB significantly strengthened performance in MoCA (β = 0.56, 95%CI: 0.08, 1.05). IL-6, IL-8, and high-sensitivity CRP significantly verified among three groups. Changes in IL-6 within postoperative 3 months were negatively correlated with MMSE and MoCA, and positively correlated with AVLT-DR for QLB group. Similar correlation was found in the GA group for changes in IL-6 and AVLT-IR. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy ideally improved memory and attention as early as postoperative 1 month. QLB promoted cognitive improvement in MoCA, which was negatively correlated with changes in IL-6. More precise trials are needed to determine the overall effect of peripheral neural block on cognition following bariatric surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".