MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086066251 · doi:10.1136/rapm-2020-101894

Evaluation of nerve capture using classical landmarks for genicular nerve radiofrequency ablation: 3D cadaveric study

2020· article· en· W3086066251 on OpenAlexaff
John Tran, Philip Peng, Anne Agur

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmMedicineCadaverAnatomyRadiofrequency ablationCannulaAblationBiomedical engineeringSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Radiofrequency (RF) denervation of the superolateral genicular nerve (SLGN), superomedial genicular nerve (SMGN) and inferomedial genicular nerve (IMGN) is commonly used to manage chronic knee joint pain. However, knowledge of articular branches captured, using classical landmarking techniques, remains unclear. In order to enhance and propose new RF procedures that conceivably capture a greater number of articular branches, more detailed cadaveric investigation is required. The objectives were to (1) determine which articular branches are captured or spared using classical landmarking techniques, and (2) evaluate the anatomical feasibility of classical landmarking techniques using three-dimensional (3D) modeling technology. METHODS: Ultrasound-guided classical superolateral/superomedial/inferomedial landmarking techniques were used to position RF cannulae in five specimens. The articular branches, bony and soft tissue landmarks, and cannula tip position, were meticulously dissected, digitized and modeled in 3D. Simulated lesions were positioned at the cannula tip, on the 3D models, to determine which articular branches were captured or spared. Capture rates of articular branches were compared. RESULTS: In all specimens, classical superolateral/superomedial techniques captured the transverse deep branches of SLGN and SMGN, and articular branches of lateral and medial nerve to vastus intermedius, while sparing distal branches of SLGN/SMGN. The inferomedial technique captured anterior branches of IMGN while sparing the posterior and inferior branches. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides anatomical evidence supporting the effectiveness of classical landmarking for genicular nerve ablation; however, each technique resulted in sparing of articular branches. The extensive innervation of the knee joint suggests the use of supplementary landmarks to improve capture rates and potentially patient outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegional Anesthesia & Pain MedicineSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207