MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1956758187 · doi:10.1111/pme.12010

Ultrasound-Guided Cervical Periradicular Steroid Injection for Cervical Radicular Pain: Relevance of Spread Pattern and Degree of Penetration of Contrast Medium

2012· article· en· W1956758187 on OpenAlexaff
Sang Hoon Lee, Jin-Myung Kim, Vincent Chan, Hyo-Joon Kim, Hyoung-Ihl Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntervertebral foramenFluoroscopyForamenRadicular painUltrasoundContrast mediumRadiologyCervical NerveNerve rootSurgeryLumbar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Ultrasound-guided cervical periradicular steroid injection (US-CPSI) is an attractive alternate to conventional C-arm guided transforaminal epidural injection for treatment of cervical radicular pain. We compared the technical differences and clinical outcomes between these two techniques. METHODS: Following ultrasound-guided needle placement, the extent of contrast media spread and the degree of tissue penetration were monitored by real-time fluoroscopy at the time of cervical periradicular injection in 59 patients. The spread pattern was judged to be medial foramen (medial bisector of foramen), lateral foramen (lateral bisector of foramen), or extraforaminal. The degree of tissue penetration was classified into periradicular, pararadicular, and intramuscular based on the penetration characteristics. Ultrasonographic images were categorized into crescent, perineuronal protruding, and intramuscular types. These groups were then correlated with clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The actual distance between the ultrasound-guided needle position and fluoroscopic target point was 1.9 and 2.3 cm in the oblique and anteroposterior view, respectively. Despite a difference in ultrasound and fluoroscopic end points, contrast dye spread was found to reach lateral foramen in 53%, medial foramen in 34%, and extraforaminal in 13% of the subjects. Analysis of postprocedural pain reduction (PPPR) showed significantly the better outcomes in periradicular and pararadicular penetration, medial and lateral, and crescent and perineural protruding type without subgroup differences than intramuscular penetration, extraforaminal spread, and ultrasonographic images of intramuscular type (P < 0.001). Analysis of clinical overall outcome showed favorable outcome in the groups with better results of PPPR. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary data suggest that the technique of UP-CPSI can provide an adequate local spread pattern, tissue penetration for treatment of cervical radicular pain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain MedicineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207