MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391444909 · doi:10.14740/jocmr5059

Use of a Novel Buffered Hypertonic Saline Solution for Fluid Replacement and Resuscitation During Spinal Surgery in Adolescents

2024· article· en· W4391444909 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maria Lysandrou, Julie Rice‐Weimer, Sibelle Aurelie Yemele Kitio, Islam Elmitwalli, Allen Kadado, Walter Samora, Marco Corridore, Joseph D. Tobias

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypertonic salineResuscitationTonicitySalineAnesthesiaAlbuminOrthopedic surgeryIntravascular volume statusSurgeryInternal medicineHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: During major orthopedic procedures, such as posterior spinal fusion (PSF), isotonic fluids, colloids, starches, or gelatins are commonly used to replace the preoperative fluid deficit and provide ongoing fluid resuscitation. Given recent concerns regarding the potential adverse physiologic effects of albumin solutions, we have modified our intraoperative practice to include the use of a novel 2% buffered hypertonic saline solution during major orthopedic procedures. We present our preliminary clinical experience with this novel fluid for intraoperative resuscitation and its impact on limiting the use of 5% albumin. Methods: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients who received 2% buffered hypertonic saline during PSF. The intraoperative course of these patients was compared to case-matched control patients who received standard care with isotonic fluids plus 5% albumin as an adjunct for intravascular resuscitation. Results: The study cohort included 23 patients who received 2% buffered hypertonic saline and 25 in the case-matched control group. There was no difference in the volume of intraoperative isotonic crystalloid fluids, estimated blood loss, and urine output between the two groups. In the control cohort, 19 of 25 patients (76%) received 5% albumin compared to only six of 23 patients (26%, P = 0.0005) in the 2% buffered hypertonic saline group. The final pH was higher in the patients that received 2% buffered hypertonic saline than in the control group (7.40 ± 0.03 versus 7.36 ± 0.06, P = 0.0131). Additionally, the starting and final serum sodium values were higher in the patients that received 2% buffered hypertonic saline, although no difference was noted in the mean change from the starting value (average increase of 2 mEq/L in both groups). Conclusion: Use of a novel 2% buffered hypertonic saline solution for intraoperative resuscitation during major orthopedic procedures decreases the need for 5% albumin while avoiding the development of hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis which may occur with standard sodium chloride solutions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.000
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.459
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.075 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research→Same topicTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→