Retrospective analysis of adriamycln interventional treatment on trigeminal neuralgia under dual guidance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the differences of the short-term and long-term therapeutic efficacy of adriamycin injection around trigeminal ganglion for treatment of trigeminal neuralgia under the guidance of X-ray and different electric stimulation generated by neurostimulator.Methods A total of 103 patients with trigeminal neuralgia were divided into three groups on the basis of different electric stimulation: Group A(the stimulated current was lower than 0.1 mA),Group B(the stimulated current was between 0.1 mA and 0.4 mA),Group C(the stimulated current was higher than 0.4 mA).Total score of PRI,PPI,VAS of McGill and the rate of effectiveness and adverse effects were recorded at 1,2,4,8,16,24 months after treatment.Results There were significant differences of PRI,VAS between Group A(n=35) and Group C(n=30) at 16,24 months(P0.05),the difference of PPI between Group A and Group C was significant at 24 months(P0.05),the difference of PRI between Group B(n=38) and Group C was significant at 24 months(P0.05).Conclusion The lower the electric stimulation generated by neurostimulator,the better the short-term and long-term therapeutic efficacy of adriamycin injection around trigeminal ganglion for treatment of trigeminal neuralgia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".