MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004000343 · doi:10.1097/aap.0000000000000016

Ultrasound-guided Sciatic Nerve Block in Overweight and Obese Patients

2013· article· en· W2004000343 on OpenAlexaff
Faraj W. Abdallah, Vincent Chan, Arkadiy Koshkin, Sherif Abbas, Richard Brull

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaSciatic nerveConfidence intervalLidocaineOverweightNerve blockUltrasoundSurgeryBody mass indexInternal medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Despite ultrasound (US) guidance, sciatic nerve block (SNB) remains among the least performed peripheral blocks. By targeting the tissue plane between the gluteus maximus and quadratus femoris muscles, the US-guided subgluteal space technique may facilitate the performance of US-guided SNB. We aimed to evaluate whether the subgluteal space technique shortens SNB performance time in overweight and obese patients compared with the conventional infragluteal technique. METHODS: Overweight and obese patients (body mass index, > 25 kg m ) undergoing US-guided SNB for knee arthroplasty received 30 mL admixture (1:2 lidocaine 2%; bupivacaine 0.5% with 1:200,000 epinephrine) in the tissue plane between the gluteus maximus and quadratus femoris (subgluteal space group) or around the sciatic nerve at the infragluteal level (infragluteal group). All patients received spinal anesthesia, continuous femoral nerve block, and postoperative multimodal analgesia. The primary outcome was SNB performance time defined as the time interval between placement of the US transducer on skin, and needle withdrawal after injection. Number of needle passes, procedural pain, SNB-related complications, SNB success, postoperative pain, and opioid consumption were also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were assessed (subgluteal space, 14; infragluteal, 13). Mean SNB performance time was 4.4 minutes (95% confidence interval, 3.7-5.0) for the subgluteal space group and 9.0 minutes (95% confidence interval, 7.7-10.3) for the infragluteal group (P < 0.0001). Number of needle passes and procedural pain scores were lower in the subgluteal space group. There were no differences in SNB success or analgesic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The subgluteal space technique may be performed 50% faster, with no detectable differences in block success and analgesic efficacy, compared with the infragluteal technique for US-guided SNB in overweight and obese patients receiving multimodal analgesia. Injection of local anesthetics along tissue planes may produce similar block characteristics to perineural injection for US-guided SNB.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

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

Citations81
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegional Anesthesia & Pain MedicineSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207