ArticleClinical medicine insights. Case reports2025
Management of Suspected Malignant Hyperthermia With Dantrolene: Clinical Insights From 2 Case Reports in a Single-Center Experience.
Article in Clinical medicine insights. Case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Malignant hyperthermia (MH) is a fatal hypermetabolic reaction of skeletal muscle, triggered by exposure to volatile anesthetic agents or depolarizing muscle relaxants. It typically exhibits hypercarbia, muscle rigidity, tachycardia, and hyperthermia. Diagnosis is often confirmed through a muscle biopsy for the in vitro contracture test or by identifying pathogenic genetic variants. Case Presentation: We report 2 cases of suspected MH. The first case involved a 4-year-old female (20 kg) undergoing adenotonsillectomy, and the second involved a 13-year-old female (56 kg) who underwent pedicle screw fixation surgery. Both patients had unremarkable medical histories. During maintenance of general anesthesia with sevoflurane, they developed clinical signs highly suggestive of MH-10 minutes after exposure in the first case and 120 minutes after exposure in the second case. Both cases were managed with dantrolene and supportive care. In the first case, dantrolene was administered 4 hours after the initial signs, by which time significant rhabdomyolysis had already developed. In the second case, early administration within 10 minutes was associated with a much milder degree of rhabdomyolysis. Conclusion: Early recognition of symptoms and accurate differentiation of MH from similar conditions are essential for favorable outcomes. Prompt administration of dantrolene at the first sign of an MH reaction is critical for effective management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.