MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318912012 · doi:10.1093/pm/pnad011

Stellate ganglion block for non-pain indications: a scoping review

2023· review· en· W4318912012 on OpenAlexaff
Guy Feigin, Sofia Velasco Figueroa, Marina Englesakis, Rohan D’Souza, Yasmine Hoydonckx, Anuj Bhatia

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePain managementStellate ganglionBlock (permutation group theory)AnesthesiaAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Stellate ganglion block (SGB) is performed to relieve head, face, neck, or upper limb pain, and several non-pain indications for performing this block have emerged over the years. To date, there has been no attempt to synthesize evidence on SGB for treating non-pain indications. This scoping review presents a summary of the efficacy and adverse effects of SGB when performed for 6 non-pain indications. METHODS: This scoping review was accomplished through the use of Arksey and O'Malley framework. A literature search was conducted for relevant articles in medical databases to identify publications on SGB and specified study types. Two reviewers independently assessed the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized comparative studies, and case series. Results were summarized and recommendations were made on the basis of the strength of the available evidence according to the US Preventative Services Task Force grading system. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies (19 randomized controlled trials and 5 nonrandomized studies) were included in this review. On the basis of the evidence, SGB is recommended for obtunding cardiovascular sympathetic stimulation, improving perfusion in limbs, and alleviating menopausal symptoms with a Grade B or C recommendation and a moderate-to-low level of certainty. There was insufficient evidence to recommend SGB for the other indications. CONCLUSIONS: SGB can be considered for obtunding cardiovascular sympathetic stimulation and stress response, reducing vascular tone to improve vascular insufficiency in the limbs and perioperative hemodynamic stability, and alleviating hot flashes in menopause, in conditions refractory to conventional medical management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0140.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain MedicineSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207