Lateral cervical epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation for continuous unilateral upper extremity analgesia following a failed continuous peripheral nerve block
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case report describes the application of electrical stimulation (Tsui test) to confirm placement of a cervical epidural catheter for postoperative pain management in a patient with a failed brachial plexus block who underwent upper extremity surgery. An epidural catheter was easily advanced under nerve stimulation guidance to the surgical dermatome C4 level without any resistance from the C7-T1 level. Successful analgesia was achieved with a bolus of 2 mg ml(-1) ropivacaine 2 ml and fentanyl 20 microg, followed by a continuous infusion of 2 mg ml(-1) ropivacaine with 2 microg ml(-1) of fentanyl at a rate of 2 ml h(-1). This case reminds the clinician that cervical epidural analgesia may serve as an alternative to a difficult continuous peripheral nerve block. Electrical stimulation may also help to confirm cervical epidural catheter placement at the appropriate dermatome to provide effective analgesia with minimal side-effects.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".