Erector spinae plane block, neuropathic pain and quality of life after video-assisted thoracoscopy surgery. Pilot, observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is a valuable alternative for pain management after video-assisted thoracoscopy surgery (VATS). The incidence of postoperative chronic neuropathic pain (CNP) is high while the quality of life (QoL) after VATS remains unknown. We hypothesised that patients with ESPB would have a low incidence of acute and CNP and would report a good QoL up to three months after VATS. METHODS: We conducted a single-centre prospective pilot cohort study from January to April 2020. ESPB after VATS was the standard practice. The primary outcome was the incidence of CNP three months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included QoL assessed by the EuroQoL questionnaire three months after surgery and pain control at the Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit (PACU), 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. RESULTS: We conducted a single-centre prospective pilot cohort study from January to April 2020. ESPB after VATS was the standard practice. The primary outcome was the incidence of CNP three months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included QoL assessed by the EuroQoL questionnaire three months after surgery and pain control at the Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit (PACU), 12 and 24 hours postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: We conducted a single-centre prospective pilot cohort study from January to April 2020. ESPB after VATS was the standard practice. The primary outcome was the incidence of CNP three months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included QoL assessed by the EuroQoL questionnaire three months after surgery and pain control at the Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit (PACU), 12 and 24 hours postoperatively.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".