Radio Frequency in the Treatment of Lumbar Facet Joint Arthropathy: Indications and Technical Notes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low back pain is one of the most reported symptoms in adult life. Different etiologies have been evoked. Degenerative disease of the spine is the most common cause. Facet joint arthropathy is the second leading cause of low back pain in degenerative disease. Failure of medical treatment will lead to more invasive therapeutic option. Radio frequency is a well-known therapeutic option for refractory low back pain related to facet arthropathy. We present our results analyzed retrospectively between January 2015 and March 2018. In addition, we describe our workflow, our procedure technique, and our results. According to our findings, 73% improved their VAS pain score by at least 50% over 3 months. Twenty-seven percent failed to improve with this procedure. There was a 20-point improvement on the SF-36 QOL; the overall satisfaction was high. When patients are selected carefully, radio-frequency ablation technique is a safe and efficient procedure. Its complication rate and cost are low. We recommend it as one of the therapeutic tools in the management of low back pain related to facet joint disease.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".