MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289391073 · doi:10.1111/papr.12437

Ultrasound‐Guided Superior Hypogastric Plexus Block: A Cadaveric Feasibility Study with Fluoroscopic Confirmation

2016· article· en· W2289391073 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Gofeld, Chuan‐Whei Lee

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersUniversity of Washington
KeywordsCadaveric spasmMedicineUltrasoundFluoroscopyRadiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plancarte first described a fluoroscopy-guided superior hypogastric plexus block to manage pelvic pain in 1990. Modifications have since been described using different imaging modalities. Ultrasound-guided approach has been described in a clinical outcome study. However, the accuracy of an ultrasound-guided method has never been validated by alternative imaging. We conducted an experiment aiming to develop ultrasound-guided superior hypogastric plexus block using human cadavers in the supine position. Final needle position and spread of a radiopaque contrast was verified by fluoroscopy, a standard imaging tool. The needle approach to the L5 vertebral body was performed in the short axis as has been recommended. Injection of radiopaque contrast revealed unilateral and cephalad spread to the L5/S1 disk. Additional transabdominal long-axis scanning of the lumbosacral segment was and the needle trajectory was modified to aim for the apex of the L5/S1 disk. Bilateral spread was achieved by strict midline placement of the needle tip and real-time observation of injection. The modified ultrasound-guided technique resulted in a similar spread of injectate as the traditional fluoroscopy-guided technique that in a clinical scenario would offer complete block of the superior hypogastric plexus.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain PracticeSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207