<p>Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy Increases Electrical Stimulation Threshold of Sciatic Nerve: A Prospective Parallel Cohort Study</p>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the impact of diabetic peripheral neuropathy and its severity on the threshold of sciatic nerve electrical stimulation in diabetic patients. Patients and Methods: The case–control study included 60 patients that were divided into non-diabetic patients (control group, n = 26) and diabetic patients (diabetes group, n = 34). All the patients who were scheduled for lower leg, foot, and ankle surgery received a popliteal sciatic nerve block. We recorded the minimum current required to produce motor activity of the sciatic nerve during ultrasound-guided popliteal sciatic nerve block. Results: Among the 60 patients, the sciatic nerve innervated muscle contractile response was successfully elicited in 57 patients (dorsiflexion of foot, plantar flexion, foot valgus or adduction, toe flexion, etc.) under electric stimulation. We failed to elicit the motor response in three patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy, even when the stimulation current was 3 mA. The average electrical stimulation threshold (1.0 ± 0.7 mA) in the diabetes group was significantly higher than that of the control group (0.4 ± 0.1 mA). Diabetic patients with peripheral neuropathy had a higher electrical stimulation threshold (1.2 ± 0.7 mA) than patients without peripheral neuropathy (0.4 ± 0.1 mA). Furthermore, the electrical stimulation threshold of the sciatic nerve in diabetic patients had a linear dependence on the Toronto Clinical Scoring System (TCSS) peripheral neuropathy score (electrical stimulation threshold [in mA] = 0.125 TCSS score) ( P < 0.001). Conclusion: The threshold of electrical stimulation to elicit a motor response of the sciatic nerve was increased in diabetic patients, and the threshold of electrical stimulation of the sciatic nerve increased with the severity of diabetic nerve dysfunction. Keywords: diabetes mellitus, peripheral neuropathy, electrical stimulation threshold, nerve block
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".