MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2508371222 · doi:10.1097/aap.0000000000000451

The Erector Spinae Plane Block

2016· article· en· W2508371222 on OpenAlexaff
Mauricio Forero, Sanjib Das Adhikary, Hector Lopez, Calvin Tsui, Ki Jinn Chin

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeuropathic painNerve blockAnesthesiaIntercostal nervesNeuralgiaBlock (permutation group theory)Thoracic vertebraeInterventional pain managementSurgeryPain managementLumbar vertebraeLumbar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thoracic neuropathic pain is a debilitating condition that is often poorly responsive to oral and topical pharmacotherapy. The benefit of interventional nerve block procedures is unclear due to a paucity of evidence and the invasiveness of the described techniques. In this report, we describe a novel interfascial plane block, the erector spinae plane (ESP) block, and its successful application in 2 cases of severe neuropathic pain (the first resulting from metastatic disease of the ribs, and the second from malunion of multiple rib fractures). In both cases, the ESP block also produced an extensive multidermatomal sensory block. Anatomical and radiological investigation in fresh cadavers indicates that its likely site of action is at the dorsal and ventral rami of the thoracic spinal nerves. The ESP block holds promise as a simple and safe technique for thoracic analgesia in both chronic neuropathic pain as well as acute postsurgical or posttraumatic pain.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2,141
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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