Preliminary evaluation of an indwelling epidural catheter for repeat methylprednisolone administration in canine lumbosacral stenosis.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine the complications, outcomes, and patency of a permanent epidural catheter and subcutaneous access port system (ECAPS) as part of conservative management of degenerative lumbosacral stenosis in dogs. Animals and procedure: Medical records of 11 client-owned dogs that underwent an ECAPS insertion were evaluated retrospectively. Clinical signs, complications related to the procedure, and system patency are reported. Results: All dogs had lumbosacral pain at their initial neurological assessment, with comfort levels adequately controlled following epidural infiltrations. None suffered from complications related to the ECAPS procedure. In 10 dogs, there were no malfunctions for the duration of the study. However, in 1 dog, there was a suspected leak at Day 814. The longest duration of patency reported in this study was 870 d (at the time of writing). Conclusion: Placement of an ECAPS is a feasible technique and a viable option to permit repeated epidural injections of steroids in dogs with degenerative lumbosacral stenosis that is managed conservatively. Further studies are required to evaluate complication rates.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".