Novel use of continuous pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block technique for traumatic superior and inferior pubic rami fractures: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pubic rami fractures are painful injuries more commonly seen in the elderly with osteoporosis after high velocity trauma. In the most cases, management is conservative and non-operative with the goal to provide optimal pain relief to facilitate early mobilization and hospital discharge. Unfortunately, opioids remain the mainstay analgesic option and regional anesthesia techniques are limited but may include lumbar epidural anesthesia. CASE PRESENTATION: A female patient in her 80s presented to the emergency department of a level 1 trauma center following a high-speed motor vehicle collision. The patient suffered multiple non-life-threatening injuries. Notably, the patient was experiencing severe right groin and leg pain secondary to superior and inferior pubic rami fractures. Due to the severity of this pain, the patient was unable to mobilize or participate with physiotherapy. A lumbar epidural anesthesia technique was not deemed suitable and instead, we inserted a continuous pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with a programmed intermittent bolus regimen. Immediate relief of pain was achieved and 48 hours later, the patient still reported satisfactory pain control and started to independently mobilize. CONCLUSION: Analgesia options are limited in pubic rami fractures. We present the first published case of a novel use of the PENG block with a continuous catheter technique for the analgesic management of a traumatic superior and inferior pubic rami fracture. The clinical utility of this technique in pubic ramus fractures warrants further clinical investigation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| 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".