Supercharge End-to-Side Anterior Interosseous–to–Ulnar Motor Nerve Transfer Restores Intrinsic Function in Cubital Tunnel Syndrome
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous nerve-to-ulnar motor nerve transfer offers a viable option to enhance recovery of intrinsic function following ulnar nerve injury. However, in the setting of chronic ulnar nerve compression where the timing of onset of axonal loss is unclear, there is a deficit in the literature on outcomes after supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous nerve-to-ulnar motor nerve transfer. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous nerve-to-ulnar motor nerve transfer for severe cubital tunnel syndrome over a 5-year period was performed. The primary outcomes were improvement in first dorsal interosseous Medical Research Council grade at final follow-up and time to reinnervation. Change in key pinch strength; grip strength; and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire scores were also evaluated using paired t tests and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. RESULTS: Forty-two patients with severe cubital tunnel syndrome were included in this study. Other than age, there were no significant clinical or diagnostic variables that were predictive of failure. There was no threshold of compound muscle action potential amplitude below which supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous nerve-to-ulnar motor nerve transfer was unsuccessful. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the first cohort of outcomes following supercharge end-to-side anterior interosseous nerve-to-ulnar motor nerve transfer in chronic ulnar compression neuropathy alone and underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection. Prospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials with standardized outcome measures are required. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it