Acute sciatica and progressive neurological deficit secondary to facet synovial cysts: A report of two cases.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe two patients with lumbar facet synovial cysts causing sciatica and progressive neurological deficit. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 52-year-old female with bilateral sciatica and a neurological deficit that progressed to a foot drop; and a 54-year-old female with worsening sciatica and progressive calf weakness were seen at a major tertiary care centre. Diagnostic imaging studies revealed the presence of spinal nerve root impingement by large facet synovial cysts. INTERVENTIONS AND OUTCOMES: Activity modification, gabapentinoid and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications were unsuccessful in ameliorating either patient's symptoms. One patient had been receiving ongoing lumbar chiropractic spinal manipulative therapy despite the onset of a progressive neurological deficit. Both patients eventually required surgery to remove the cyst and decompress the affected spinal nerve roots. CONCLUSION: Patients with acute sciatica who develop a progressive neurological deficit while under care, require prompt referral for axial imaging and surgical consultation. Primary care spine clinicians need to be aware of lumbar facet synovial cysts as a possible cause of acute sciatica and the associated increased risk of the patient developing a progressive neurological deficit.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".