Hypnosis as a complementary approach in the anaesthetic management of anterior mediastinal mass biopsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anterior mediastinal masses pose significant anaesthetic challenges, primarily due to the risks of airway compression and haemodynamic instability. We present the case of an adolescent with an anterior mediastinal mass causing severe tracheal and vascular compression, necessitating urgent diagnostic biopsies. Given the high risk associated with general anaesthesia, the procedure was performed under local anaesthesia in conjunction with clinical hypnosis. This approach was well tolerated, successfully avoiding deep sedation and airway manipulation.As the initial biopsies were inconclusive, an excisional lymph node biopsy was subsequently performed using the same anaesthetic strategy, incorporating both the hypnosis protocol and local anaesthesia. This procedure confirmed the diagnosis of Hodgkin lymphoma, enabling the prompt initiation of chemotherapy.This case underscores the potential role of clinical hypnosis as an adjunct to local anaesthesia in enhancing patient comfort and cooperation, particularly when general anaesthesia presents substantial risks.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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".