MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331542032 · doi:10.1177/0363546513499183

Intramuscular Pressure Before and After Botulinum Toxin in Chronic Exertional Compartment Syndrome of the Leg

2013· article· en· W2331542032 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMuscle and Compartmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut des sciences biologiquesInstitut national de la recherche scientifique
KeywordsBotulinum toxinToxinMedicineCompartment (ship)AnesthesiaBiologyMicrobiologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Botulinum toxin A (BoNT-A) is used in the treatment of muscle hypertrophy but has never been used in chronic exertional compartment syndrome (CECS). The objective diagnostic criterion in this condition is an abnormally elevated intramuscular pressure (IMP) in the compartment. In this study, the IMP was measured 1 minute (P1) and 5 minutes (P5) after the exercise was stopped before and after BoNT-A injection. HYPOTHESIS: Botulinum toxin A reduces the IMP (P1 and P5) and eliminates the pain associated with CECS. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Botulinum toxin A was injected into the muscles of moderately trained patients with an anterior or anterolateral exertional compartment syndrome of the leg. The BoNT-A dose (mean ± SD) ranged from 76 ± 7 to 108 ± 10 U per muscle, depending on which of the 5 muscles in the 2 compartments were injected. The primary end point was IMP (P1, P5). Secondary end points were exertional pain, muscle strength, and safety. Follow-up was conducted up to 9 months. RESULTS: A total of 25 anterior compartments and 17 lateral compartments were injected in 16 patients. The time interval (mean ± SD) between the BoNT-A injection and after BoNT-A injection IMP measurement was 4.4 ± 1.6 months (range, 3-9 months). In the anterior compartment, P1 and P5 fell by 63% ± 17% (P < .00001) and 59% ± 24% (P < .0001), respectively; in the lateral compartment, P1 and P5 fell by 68% ± 21% (P < .001) and 63% ± 21% (P < .01), respectively. Exertional pain and muscle strength were monitored, based on the Medical Research Council score. The exertional pain was completely eliminated in 15 patients (94%). In 5 patients (31%), the strength of the injected muscles remained normal. In 11 patients (69%), strength decreased from 4.5 (out of 5) to 3.5 (P < .01), although without functional consequences. In the conditions of this study, BoNT-A showed a good safety profile in patients with CECS. CONCLUSION: In this case series, BoNT-A reduced the IMP and eliminated exertional pain in anterior or anterolateral CECS of the leg for up to 9 months after the intervention. The mode of action of BoNT-A is still unclear. A randomized controlled study should be carried out to determine whether BoNT-A can be used as a medical alternative to surgical treatment.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.228 · 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