MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137106867 · doi:10.36076/ppj.2012/15/333

Methylene Blue in the Treatment of DiscogenicLow Back Pain

2012· article· en· W3137106867 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Physician · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDiscographyChymopapainRadiofrequency thermocoagulationLow back painProvocation testBack painSurgeryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The personal and societal impact of chronic low back pain is considerable. The intervertebral disc is considered the etiologic source in up to 40% of patients, with considerable previous efforts directed at developing reliable and efficacious treatments. Recent publications, including a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, using a one-time treatment of methylene blue, showed statistically significant, clinically relevant improvements in pain and function in the treatment groups. The postulated mechanism of action of methylene blue is denervation of small nociceptive fibers that grow into the annulus fibrosis, which are implicated in discogenic pain. Study Design: Retrospective case series. Setting: Academic pain management center. Objectives: To examine the outcomes for a cohort of patients treated with methylene blue for discogenic pain, discuss potential differences in selection and administration protocols and briefly review other proposed treatments for discogenic pain (e.g. intradiscal electrothermy therapy, intradiscal steroids, intradiscal biaccuplasty, rami communicans radiofrequency thermocoagulation, and chymopapain ). Methods: This case series examines the pain and functional outcomes in 8 patients treated with a one-time administration of methylene blue for discogenic back pain. Follow-up information was available between 2 months and over one year, depending on the patient. Results: Application of this treatment for these 8 patients for discogenic pain diagnosed by provocation discography showed only one clinical success at our center. Four patients had a time-limited clinical response in pain and/or function between 2 weeks and 5 months. Patient specific data are outlined in detail herein. Conclusions: Low back pain ascribed to a discogenic source continues to be an elusive clinical entity to treat. We have reserved further treatment of methylene blue for discogenic pain until other controlled trials have been published. Limitations: A case series. Key Words: Low back pain, discogenic pain, provocation discography, methylene blue, spinal injections, intervertebral disc therapy, intradiscal therapy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.741
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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