Dorsal root ganglion: a key to understanding the therapeutic effects of the erector spinae plane (ESP) and other intertransverse process blocks?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since its description in 2016, the erector spinae plane block (ESPB) has become a widely employed regional anesthetic technique and kindled interest in a range of related techniques, collectively termed intertransverse process blocks. There has been ongoing controversy over mechanism of action of the ESPB, mainly due to incongruities between results of cutaneous sensory testing, clinical efficacy studies, and investigations into the neural structures that are reached by injected local anesthetic (LA). This paper reviews the spread of LA to the paravertebral and epidural space and the cutaneous anesthesia in ESPB, with specific emphasis on the dorsal root ganglion (DRG). We hypothesize that the DRG, due to its unique and complex microarchitecture, represents a key therapeutic target for modulation of nociceptive signaling in regional anesthesia. This paper discusses how the anatomical and physiological characteristics of the DRG may be one of the factors underpinning the clinical analgesia observed in ESPB and other intertransverse process blocks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".