Percutaneous Trigeminal Rhizotomy for Facial Pain Secondary to Head and Neck Malignancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nearly 80% of patients with head and neck cancers experience facial pain related to their tumor or treatment. The majority obtain pain relief with appropriate medical treatment. Occasionally some remain refractory to all analgesics or cannot tolerate the accompanying side effects. They may benefit from surgical intervention. OBJECTIVES: We report a case of medically intractable facial pain secondary to squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue that was successfully treated with percutaneous trigeminal rhizotomy. METHODS: Percutaneous trigeminal radiofrequency rhizotomy involves thermoablation of the trigeminal nerve within Meckel's cave by an electrode inserted through the cheek and foramen ovale. RESULTS: Facial pain was successfully controlled postoperatively. DISCUSSION: Percutaneous trigeminal rhizotomy is a surgical option for managing nociceptive pain secondary to a head and neck malignancy. This technique, last reported in the literature almost 30 years ago, must not be forgotten by the next generation of oncologists, pain specialists, and neurosurgeons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".