Cordotomy under general anesthesia for a pediatric palliative patient: illustrative case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Computed tomography (CT)-guided cordotomy has been shown to be a safe and effective method for treating cancer pain in adults in a palliative care setting. Its effectiveness has been rarely reported in children. During cordotomy, patient feedback is considered essential. Unfortunately, in this report, the featured patient's age and demeanor precluded an awake cordotomy. The authors report the first case, to their knowledge, of percutaneous cordotomy with the patient under general anesthesia. OBSERVATIONS: An 11-year-old boy with osteosarcoma of the right pelvis presented with medically refractory unilateral nociceptive pain. The pain prevented ambulation, interfered with sleep, was the focus of his concern, and could not be relieved without sedation. A left percutaneous CT-guided cervical cordotomy while he was under general anesthesia was performed without complication and provided sufficient pain relief to allow ambulation and restorative sleep. Pain was no longer an issue for the patient and his family. LESSONS: CT-guided percutaneous cervical cordotomy can be accomplished in a pediatric patient under general anesthesia. The risks of cordotomy under general anesthesia without patient feedback must be weighed against the opportunity to improve palliative care. https://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/CASE2427.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".