MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413469761 · doi:10.5455/ovj.2025.v15.i7.47

Lidocaine and remifentanil for ventricular tachycardia suppression in a dog: A case report

2025· article· en· W4413469761 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alyssa Brum de Souza Pahim, Maria Madalena Pessoa Guerra, João Pedro Scussel Feranti, Marília Barros Oliveira

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Veterinary Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemifentanilMedicineLidocaineAnesthesiaTachycardiaPropofolVentricular tachycardiaSevofluraneSinus tachycardiaCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ventricular tachycardia is an arrhythmia that, if not corrected, can lead to reduced ischemic stroke volume and cardiac output, resulting in low tissue perfusion. Aim: To describe a case of ventricular tachycardia suppression using lidocaine and remifentanil in a dog during the transanesthetic period. Case Description: An 11-year-old Labrador Retriever dog with intraoral neoplasia was referred for hemimandibulectomy. Preanesthetic evaluation and complementary diagnostic tests revealed the presence of splenic neoplasia along with paroxysmal ventricular tachycardia. The preanesthetic medication was methadone, and the patient was induced into general anesthesia using propofol. During the transanesthetic period, anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and continuous infusion of lidocaine and remifentanil. Throughout the procedure, the patient remained in sinus tachycardia without any arrhythmic events. Conclusion: The arrhythmias on electrocardiogram during the transanesthetic period highlight the effective control of paroxysmal ventricular tachycardia through the use of lidocaine and remifentanil infusion.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Veterinary JournalSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207