Poster 240 Using Ultrasonography to Diagnose Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
S. Rajasekaran, No Disclosures. To test the hypotheses that CECS patients have an increased anterior compartment thickness (ultrasonography) than controls and an increased estimated compliance compared to non-CECS patients. Prospective, comparative study. Radiology department. Six subjects (three females and three males) with exertional leg pain and 10 controls. Our ultrasonography technique was validated with a precision phase (10 controls) prior to scanning study patients. Subjects first ran on a treadmill until symptomatic (≥5 minutes) using a standardized protocol. Anterior compartment thickness (ultrasonography), and anterior compartment pressures were measured prior to exercise and at scheduled intervals afterwards. Controls (N=10) underwent the same regimen without needle testing (10 minutes on treadmill, same protocol). Anterior compartment pressure, percentage changes in anterior compartment thickness, and estimated compliance. The diagnosis of CECS was made based upon standard compartment pressure thresholds. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to analyze our data. Mean percentage changes in anterior compartment thickness from rest in CECS (N=4) and controls (N=9) were 21.3±9.0% vs 6.3±8.1% at 0.5 minutes (P=.01), 24.6±8.7% vs 4.2±7.9% at 2.5 minutes (P=.003), and 24.9±6.7% vs 5.1±7.7% at 4.5 minutes (P=.003), respectively. Compartment pressures (mmHg±SD) in CECS and non-CECS patients were 21.5±2.7 vs 10±1.5 at rest, 38.3±5.0 vs 23±3.2 at 1 minute and 34.5±4.4 vs 20±2.1 at 3 minutes (P=.06), respectively; Estimated compliances [change in width (cm) over change in pressure] were 3.6x10-2±1.6x10-2 vs 3.0x10-4±1x10-2 at 0.5 minutes/1 minute, 5.6x10-2±2.8x10-2 vs −6.4x10-3±2.0x10-2 at 2.5 minutes/3 minutes and 5.7x10-2±4.1x10-1 vs 1.7x10-3±1.0x10-2 at 4.5 minutes/5 minutes (P=.06), respectively. Ultrasonography reveals a significant increase in anterior compartment thickness in CECS patients compared to controls and an increased estimated compliance in CECS vs non-CECS patients. Our study supports the role of ultrasonography, a noninvasive tool in the diagnosis of CECS. Future studies need to be undertaken with more subjects to validate our technique for clinical use.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".