Ultrasound‐guided injection of the elbow: Cadaveric description for the proximal to distal approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound (US) guided intra-articular elbow injections are commonly performed in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To describe a proximal to distal approach for US-guided intra-articular elbow injection. DESIGN: Cadaveric study. SETTINGS: Academic institution. METHODS: Both elbows of a single cadaver were injected with green-colored water-diluted latex dye using the US-guided proximal to distal approach. In the left elbow, the needle was kept in situ; in the right elbow, the needle was removed. Subsequently, a layer-by-layer anatomical dissection was performed in both elbows. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Presence and distribution of the latex dye and location of the needle tip within the elbow joint capsule. RESULTS: Anatomical dissection of both elbows confirmed the correct intra-articular position of the needle tip in the left elbow as well as correct placement of the latex dye bilaterally. During layer-by-layer dissection of the left elbow, the position of the radial nerve was observed anterior to the needle. CONCLUSIONS: This cadaveric observation demonstrated that the US-guided proximal to distal approach is a convenient technique to access the elbow joint. Compared to the previously described techniques, the in-plane, proximal to distal approach may provide excellent needle visibility during the entire procedure, precisely targeting the articular space. The preliminary data need to be validated in additional clinical studies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".