MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405221618 · doi:10.1093/jsxmed/qdae167.113

(115) RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL OF METHOXYFLURANE AND LOCAL ANESTHESIA VS. LOCAL ANESTHESIA ONLY FOR SCROTAL SURGERY

2024· article· en· W4405221618 on OpenAlexaff
Jatin P. Shah, David Chung, Harpreet S. Dhillon, Maximilian Fidel, Dhiraj S. Bal, Carla Roque, Yu Ko, Premal Patel

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsManitoba HealthUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMethoxyfluraneMedicineAnesthesiaRandomized controlled trialLocal anesthesiaSurgeryRegional anesthesiaHalothane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction There is a growing recognition within urologic care of the benefits of utilizing procedures performed under local anesthesia in an ambulatory setting. This approach not only mitigates the risks associated with general or spinal anesthesia but also addresses concerns related to increased wait times and enhances accessibility for patients. Building upon previous research indicating the viability of local anesthesia (LA) in penoscrotal procedures, there is a growing interest in exploring complementary approaches to further optimize patient outcomes. However, despite the efficacy of LA alone, factors such as needle phobia, anxiety, and prior negative experiences can impact its effectiveness. Short-acting, inhaled anesthetics like methoxyflurane have shown efficacy in trauma care and as an anxiolytic during medical procedures, especially at low doses. They provide advantages such as enabling spontaneous ventilation and maintaining airway reflexes, with a faster onset and longer-lasting analgesic effects compared to nitrous oxide. This makes methoxyflurane particularly advantageous for ambulatory surgery. Objective This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether incorporating inhaled methoxyflurane as an adjunct to LA improves pain tolerance and reduces anxiety levels compared to LA alone. Methods Patients aged 18-65 undergoing scrotal procedures (hydrocelectomy, spermatocelectomy, epididymectomy) are eligible for recruitment. Exclusion criteria include a history of substance use disorder, renal impairment, liver dysfunction, hypersensitivity to methoxyflurane or related agents, and personal or family history of malignant hyperthermia. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the LA-only control group (administered with a 50/50 lidocaine and bupivacaine mixture) or the methoxyflurane + LA group. Baseline demographics will be collected with a validated 6-question STAI short form for anxiety assessment, and self-reported pain levels and scrotal procedure history. Post-procedure, participants will immediately rate procedural pain and anxiety levels, with follow-up assessments for adverse events conducted 2-4 weeks later. Data analysis will employ descriptive statistics and Welch’s t-tests to evaluate outcomes. This study is expected to be completed in September of 2024. Results A total of 12 patients have been recruited thus far with an average age of 65.3 ± 13.6 in the methoxyflurane group (n = 7) and 39.0 ± 12.6 in the control group (n = 5, p = 0.007). Baseline pain levels self-reported by the methoxyflurane group averaged 1.1 ± 2.3, while the control group reported 2.4 ± 2.3 (p = 0.37) on a scale of 1 (no pain), 10 (maximal pain). Similarly, baseline anxiety levels, as measured by the STAI, were 10.7 ± 3.5 for the methoxyflurane group and 11.6 ± 5.4 for the control group (p = 0.76) on a scale of 4 to 24. During the procedure, the methoxyflurane group reported procedural pain and anxiety levels of 0.28 ± 0.75 and 0, respectively, compared to 1.4 ± 1.7 and 1.6 ± 1.7 in the control group (p = 0.22, p = 0.09). No adverse events were reported. Post-procedural follow-up calls are scheduled as more participants become eligible within the designated timeframe. Conclusions Our pilot study endeavours to shed light on the potential benefits of incorporating methoxyflurane as an adjunct to LA for scrotal procedures. Our preliminary results demonstrate safety of methoxyflurane with no adverse events reported. Disclosure Any of the authors act as a consultant, employee or shareholder of an industry for: Boston Scientific.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designRandomized trial
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 venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicTesticular diseases and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207