The effect of age on the induction dose of propofol for general anesthesia in dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In people, the dose of propofol (DOP) required for procedural sedation and anesthesia decreases significantly with age. The objective of this study was to determine if the DOP required to perform endotracheal intubation decreases with age in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case series. ANIMALS: 1397 dogs. METHODS: Data from dogs anesthetized at referral center (2017-2020) were analyzed with three multivariate linear regression models with backward elimination using a combination of either absolute age, physiologic age, or life expectancy (ratio between age at the time of anesthetic event and expected age of death for each breed obtained from previous literature) as well as other factors as independent variables, and DOP as the dependent variable. The DOP for each quartile of life expectancy (<25%, 25-50%, 50-75%, 75-100%, >100%) was compared using one-way ANOVA. Significance was set at alpha = 0.025. RESULTS: Mean age was 7.2 ± 4.1 years, life expectancy 59.8 ± 33%, weight 19 ± 14 kg, and DOP 3.76 ± 1.8 mg kg-1. Among age models, only life expectancy was a predictor of DOP (-0.37 mg kg-1; P = 0.013) but of minimal clinical importance. The DOP by life age expectancy quartile was 3.9 ± 2.3, 3.8 ± 1.8, 3.6 ± 1.8, 3.7 ± 1.7, and 3.4 ± 1.6 mg kg-1, respectively (P = 0.20). Yorkshire Terrier, Chihuahua, Maltese, mixed breed dogs under 10 kg, and Shih Tzu required higher DOP. Status of neutered male, ASA E, and Boxer, Labrador and Golden Retriever breeds decreased DOP, along with certain premedication drugs. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In contrast to what is observed in people, an age cut-off predictive of DOP does not exist. Percentage of elapsed life expectancy along with other factors such as breed, premedication drug, emergency procedure, and reproductive status significantly alter DOP. In older dogs, the dose of propofol can be adjusted based on their elapsed life expectancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".