MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007356043 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e3182052213

A Comparison of Sartorius Versus Quadriceps Stimulation for Femoral Nerve Block

2010· article· en· W2007356043 on OpenAlexaff
J. Anns, Ewen W. Chen, Nasim Nirkavan, Colin J. L. McCartney, Imad T. Awad

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFemoral nerveMedicineSartorius muscleSaphenous nerveQuadriceps femoris muscleAnesthesiaRopivacaineThighMotor nerveNerve blockStimulationAnatomySurgeryInternal medicineIsometric exercise

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Femoral nerve block is widely used for regional anesthesia and analgesia in many lower limb operations. Peripheral nerve stimulation of the femoral nerve may elicit 1 of 2 responses: contraction of the sartorius muscle through stimulation of its muscular branch or contraction of the quadriceps muscle through stimulation of its respective muscular branches. Historically, a quadriceps response has been preferred. We hypothesized that the success of femoral nerve block using a sartorius muscle evoked motor response is equivalent to that using quadriceps muscle twitch response. This prospective randomized double-blind controlled trial compared sartorius or quadriceps muscle evoked motor response as the end point for stimulation for femoral nerve block. METHODS: Seventy-two patients scheduled for primary unilateral total knee arthroplasty were randomly assigned to undergo femoral nerve block using either the sartorius or the quadriceps evoked muscle response as an end point of stimulation. Motor block of the femoral and sensory block of the femoral, saphenous, and lateral femoral cutaneous nerves were assessed. The primary outcome was the quality of motor and sensory block of the femoral nerve 30 minutes after injection of 20 mL of 0.5% ropivacaine. Secondary outcomes were duration of femoral nerve block, time required to perform the nerve block, total dose of hydromorphone patient-controlled analgesia, and postoperative pain by visual analog score 24 hours after block insertion. In addition, the spread of local anesthetic and the position of the needle in relation to the femoral nerve were assessed by means of ultrasonography. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in the proportion of patients with either complete alone or complete and partial block combined between quadriceps and sartorius groups 30 minutes after block insertion; femoral nerve (P = 0.49; P = 0.13), the saphenous nerve (P = 0.64; P = 0.21), or the lateral femoral cutaneous nerves (P = 0.2; P = 0.35). Patient-controlled analgesia hydromorphone consumption was significantly higher in the group that underwent sartorius muscle stimulation ([mean ± SD] 4.9 ± 3.6 mg [range, 0-13.2 mg] vs 3.1 ± 2.7 mg [range, 0-10.0 mg]; P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that using sartorius or quadriceps evoked muscle twitch as an end point of stimulation was associated with an equivalent degree of femoral nerve block.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207