MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217791516 · doi:10.1002/acr2.11383

Transarterial Embolization for the Treatment of Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain: A Systematic Review of Indications, Safety, and Efficacy

2021· review· en· W3217791516 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueACR Open Rheumatology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone and Joint Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryTennis elbowOsteoarthritisEpicondylitisEtoricoxibPhysical therapyElbowInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter arterial "embolization" (TAE) in the treatment of chronic "musculoskeletal pain" refractory to standard therapy. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for original research articles evaluating TAE in patients with musculoskeletal conditions from database inception to January 21, 2020. Search terms employed were as follows: "embolization", "pain", "knee osteoarthritis", joint replacement, epicondylitis, tenderness, inflammation, WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), microspheres, Embozene, geniculate artery, neovascularity, transcatheter, embolic, imipenem/cilastatin sodium, angiogenesis, and "musculoskeletal". Studies involving particle "embolization" for painful musculoskeletal conditions were included. Studies of TAE for hemarthrosis or malignancy-related "musculoskeletal pain" were excluded. RESULTS: The primary search yielded 1,099 sources; 7 articles and 4 abstracts were included for data extraction. All were cohorts or case series, with low risk of bias and moderate to poor level of evidence. Heterogeneity between studies was high, precluding meta-analysis. The reviewed studies reported the safety and efficacy of TAE for the treatment of "knee osteoarthritis"; adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder; tendinopathy/enthesopathy of the knee, shoulder, elbow, and ankle; and cervical myalgia. All TAEs were reported as technically successful without major complications or subsequent serious adverse events, including no reported osteonecrosis, cutaneous ulceration, limb ischemia, cartilage degeneration, or myotendinous injury. TAE significantly reduced pain and improved function for all of the treated conditions, with durable response up to 24 months post procedure. CONCLUSION: TAE appears to be a safe and effective treatment for some types of chronic refractory "musculoskeletal pain". Randomized placebo-controlled studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.340 · 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