Can continuous low current electrical stimulation distinguish insulated needle position in the epidural and intrathecal spaces in pediatric patients?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Muscle twitches elicited with electrical stimulation (6-17 mA) during epidural insertion indicate correct epidural needle placement while muscle twitches at a lower current (<1 mA) may indicate intrathecal needle placement. This study examined whether applying continuous electrical stimulation at 6 mA could indicate needle entry into the epidural space without inadvertently penetrating the intrathecal space. METHODS: After institutional review board (IRB) approval, 10 pediatric patients scheduled for lumbar puncture were studied. Following sedation with propofol, an insulated 24-gauge Pajunck unipolar needle was inserted through an 18-gauge introducer needle placed at the L4-5 interspace. The needle was first connected to a nerve stimulator (6 mA) and advanced. At the first sign of muscle twitching, needle advancement was stopped and the threshold current for motor activity was determined. The current was then turned off, the stylet was removed and the needle checked for cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). If CSF was not present, the needle was advanced into the intrathecal space (as confirmed by the presence of CSF). Ten pediatric patients (ASA II or III) aged 7.8 +/- 4.3 years (2.8-16.0 years) were studied. RESULTS: All patients had two distinguishable threshold currents as the needle advanced. The mean threshold current to elicit muscle twitch in the presumed epidural space was 3.84 +/- 0.99 mA. CSF was not present in any of the patients at this location. The mean threshold current in the intrathecal space was 0.77 +/- 0.32 mA. The average estimated distance from the first threshold location to the intrathecal space was 3 mm. All muscle twitches were at the L3-5 myotomes. Nine muscle twitches were unilateral and one was bilateral. CONCLUSIONS: Monitoring with an insulated needle with electrical stimulation at 6 mA may prevent unintentional placement of epidural needles into the intrathecal space.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".