Anatomical study of the medial branches of the lumbar dorsal rami: implications for image-guided intervention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Fluoroscopic-guided radiofrequency ablation of the lumbar medial branches is commonly performed to manage chronic low back pain originating from the facet joints. A detailed understanding of the course of medial branches in relation to bony and soft tissue landmarks is paramount to optimizing lumbar denervation procedures, particularly parallel placement of the radiofrequency electrode. The objectives of this study were to investigate the relationship of medial branches to anatomical landmarks and discuss the implications for lumbar denervation. METHODS: Ten cadaveric specimens were meticulously dissected. The origin, course, and relationship of lumbar medial branches to bony and soft tissue landmarks were documented. RESULTS: The medial branches followed the lateral neck of superior articular process deep to the intertransversarii mediales muscle at each lumbar vertebral level. In all specimens, the medial branches coursed laterally on the anterior half of the neck and transitioned from parasagittal-to-medial on the posterior half to reach the mamillo-accessory notch. The mamillo-accessory ligament was found to not occlude the nerve on the posterior quarter of the lateral neck but rather at the mamillo-accessory notch located at the posterior margin of the superior articular process. DISCUSSION: A detailed understanding of the relationship of medial branches to anatomical landmarks is essential to optimizing needle placement for lumbar denervation procedures. The current study suggests that a parasagittal placement, with increased cranial-to-caudal angulation of the electrode, may improve parallel tip alignment with the targeted medial branch and represent a potential alternative to the traditional technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".