Quadratus lumborum block for procedural and postprocedural analgesia in renal cell carcinoma percutaneous cryoablation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assesses the efficacy of the quadratus lumborum block (QLB) in the management of procedural and periprocedural pain associated with small renal mass cryoablation. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that examines the use of QLB for pain management during percutaneous cryoablation of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). A single-center retrospective review was conducted for patients who underwent cryoablation for RCC with QLB between October 2020 and October 2021. The primary study endpoint included a total dose of procedural conscious sedation and administered, postprocedural analgesia. Technical success in cryoablation was achieved in every case. No patients required additional analgesic during or after the procedure, and no complications resulted from the use of the QLB. The QLB procedure appears to be an effective locoregional block for the management of procedural and periprocedural pain associated with renal mass cryoablation.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".