ArticleNeuroSci2024
Neuraxial Anesthesia and Risk of Root Damage: A 3D Ex Vivo Study.
Article in NeuroSci, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07210892 (Paramedian Incidence Angles in Spinal Anaesthesia), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Paramedian Incidence Angles in Spinal Anaesthesia
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cauda equina nerve roots may become damaged during neuraxial anesthesia, and post-puncture headache may appear in the case of cerebrospinal fluid leakage if needle tips are deformed due to bone contact when several attempts are needed. Our aim was to verify the correlation between skin-transverse process distance (st) and skin-dural sac distance (d) for calculation of optimal angles in a free visual guide and as a reference for the maximal depth to be traversed by the needle. Randomly selected ex vivo samples (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.