MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315047044 · doi:10.1097/aap.0b013e318235f566

A Randomized Comparison Between Subepineural and Conventional Ultrasound-Guided Popliteal Sciatic Nerve Block

2011· article· en· W2315047044 on OpenAlexaff
De Q.H. Tran, Shubada Dugani, Kevin Pham, Aref Al-Shaafi, Roderick J. Finlayson

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSciatic nerveNerve blockAdductor canalRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This prospective, randomized, observer-blinded trial compared a subepineural sciatic injection at the neural bifurcation (SUB group) and separate postbifurcation injections around the tibial and peroneal nerves. METHODS: Ultrasound-guided posterior popliteal sciatic nerve block was carried out in 50 patients. In the group that had separate postbifurcation injections around the tibial and peroneal nerves, the volume of local anesthetic (LA) (30 mL of lidocaine 1%-bupivacaine 0.25%-epinephrine 5 μg/mL) was divided equally between the tibial and peroneal nerves. In the SUB group, the 2 divisions were identified exactly at the neural bifurcation. In this location, both nerves can still be found inside a common epineural sheath. The entire volume of LA was injected between the 2 branches, inside the common sheath.A blinded observer recorded the success rate (complete sensory block at 30 mins) and onset time. The performance time, number of needle passes, and adverse events were also recorded. Total anesthesia-related time was defined as the sum of performance and onset times. RESULTS: Compared with targeted injections around the tibial and peroneal divisions, a subepineural injection resulted in a higher success rate (84% vs 56%; P = 0.032) as well as improved efficiency (decreased performance/onset/total anesthesia-related times and fewer needle passes; all P ≤ 0.028). In the SUB group, we observed no instance of neural swelling. In 3 subjects randomized to separate injections, sonographic swelling of the tibial nerve occurred after the injection of 2 mL of LA. The needle was carefully withdrawn, and the injection completed uneventfully. In 45 patients, follow-up 1 week after the surgery revealed no sensory or motor deficit. Five subjects were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with separate injections around the tibial and peroneal divisions, a single subepineural injection at the neural bifurcation provides a higher success rate and requires shorter performance, onset, and total anesthesia-related times. Further studies are required to validate the safety of the subepineural technique.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

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

Citations80
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegional Anesthesia & Pain MedicineSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207