Postoperative neurological symptoms following arthroscopic shoulder surgery with interscalene block: an exploratory secondary analysis of pooled randomized controlled trial data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Postoperative neurological symptoms (PONS) are recognized complications of regional anesthesia and orthopedic surgery. We aimed to better characterize prevalence and potential risk factors in a homogeneous population of randomized, controlled trial participants. METHODS: Data were pooled from two randomized controlled trials of analgesia after interscalene block with perineural or intravenous adjuvants (NCT02426736, NCT03270033). Participants were at least 18 years of age and undergoing arthroscopic shoulder surgery at a single ambulatory surgical center. PONS were assessed by telephone follow-up at 14 days and 6 months postoperatively, and defined as patient report of numbness, weakness, or tingling in the surgical limb, alone or in combination, and regardless of severity or etiology. RESULTS: At 14 days, PONS occurred in 83 of 477 patients (17.4%). Among these 83 patients, 10 (12.0%) continued to have symptoms a half-year after surgery. In exploratory univariate analyses, no patient, surgical or anesthetic characteristics were significantly associated with 14-day PONS except for lower postoperative day 1 Quality of Recovery-15 questionnaire total score (OR 0.97 (95% CI, 0.96 to 0.99), p<0.01). This result was driven largely by the emotional domain question scores (OR 0.90 95% CI 0.85 to 0.96, p<0.001). Report of all three of numbness, weakness and tingling at 14 days vs other 14-day symptom combinations was associated with persistent PONS at 6 months (OR 11.5 95% CI 2.2 to 61.8, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: PONS are common after arthroscopic shoulder surgery performed with single injection ultrasound-guided interscalene blocks. No definitive mitigating risk factors were identified.
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 | 0.036 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".