Interventional Pain Medicine最新文献

{"title":"A rare presentation of Horner's syndrome following cervical epidural steroid injection","authors":"Charles J. Mazof ,&nbsp;Derek H. Bui ,&nbsp;Musa M. Aner","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100615","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100615","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Horner's syndrome is a clinically significant condition caused by disruption of the oculosympathetic nerve pathway, typically presenting with ptosis, miosis, and facial anhidrosis. It can result from serious, life-threatening conditions such as trauma, carotid artery dissection, or malignancy; however, it may also arise from iatrogenic reasons, including stellate ganglion blocks, by other surgical interventions of the head and neck. While exceedingly rare, Horner's syndrome has been reported to occur after a cervical epidural steroid injection. Given the various potential etiologies of Horner's syndrome, prompt evaluation is required to rule out life-threatening conditions in the setting of an acute and unexpected presentation.</div><div>This case study describes a presentation of Horner's syndrome following a cervical epidural steroid injection (ESI) for a cervical radiculopathy. Due to the unusual nature, a serious cerebrovascular event was initially considered and urgent evaluation was advised. Fortunately, all symptoms resolved fully within two hours without medical intervention. It has been suggested that local anesthetic diffusion to the preganglionic neurons caused pharmacologic disruption of the sympathetic fibers. This case provides additional evidence to the limited reports of Horner's syndrome after cervical epidurals. It also highlights the importance of minimizing or forgoing local anesthetics, considering non-particulate steroids, and conducting emergent evaluation for new onset of neurological deficits during or after cervical ESIs.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100615"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144721868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Hematoma formation after basivertebral nerve ablation","authors":"Sean Fox ,&nbsp;Joshua Levin","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100617","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100617","url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Basivertebral nerve ablation (BVNA) has been shown to have significant and lasting effects on chronic vertebrogenic low back pain. Serious complications have been rare, including hematoma formation. However, given that the target lesion occurs at the basivertebral foramen, which not only houses the basivertebral nerve terminus but also the basivertebral vessels, hematoma formation is theoretically plausible. This case demonstrates a suspected hematoma in the extradural neural axis compartment following BVNA. The patient was treated conservatively and there were no significant lasting adverse effects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100617"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144722984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Safety and effectiveness of basivertebral nerve ablation in patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia: A real-world study","authors":"Emily Bellow,&nbsp;Derek Johnson,&nbsp;Sandi Bajrami,&nbsp;William Caldwell","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100624","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100624","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The Intracept procedure was the first FDA-cleared technique for basivertebral nerve ablation, a minimally invasive treatment for vertebrogenic chronic low back pain. While prior studies support its effectiveness, data in patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia remains limited.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of basivertebral nerve ablation with a specific focus on pain reduction, functional improvement, and the incidence of post-procedure vertebral compression fractures.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients who underwent the Intracept procedure at our institution from November 2019 to January 2025. Bone density status was categorized using available DEXA scans. Patients were stratified into a Reduced Bone Density group (N = 32), consisting of 23 patients with osteopenia and 9 with osteoporosis, and the overall cohort (N = 134). Pain severity was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at baseline and at the 4–6-week post-procedure follow-up visit, and functional improvement was determined based on patient-reported outcomes at the same time point. Post-procedure complications, including vertebral compression fractures, were monitored until the most recent available follow-up.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A significant decrease in VAS was observed for the overall cohort (7.04 vs. 3.78, p &lt; 0.001) and the Reduced Bone Density group (6.75 vs. 4.13, p &lt; 0.001). Functional improvement was reported by 79.1 % of patients in the overall study population and 78.1 % of patients in the Reduced Bone Density group. No post-procedure vertebral compression fractures were observed in the entire cohort, with a mean follow-up length of 18.07 months.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The Intracept procedure demonstrated significant pain reduction and functional improvement in the overall cohort and in patients with reduced bone density. Notably, no post-procedure vertebral compression fractures were observed, even in patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia. These findings contribute to the growing body of independent literature supporting the safety and effectiveness of the Intracept procedure and offer real-world insight into its use in patients with reduced bone density.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100624"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144842107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessing the availability, readability, and content of online patient Education materials for cancer pain interventions: A cross-sectional analysis of major cancer center websites","authors":"Meha Aggarwal ,&nbsp;Marshall Yuan ,&nbsp;David Hao","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100633","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100633","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>As cancer survival improves, chronic cancer-related pain is an increasing clinical concern. Interventional procedures offer targeted, opioid-sparing pain relief, yet the quality and readability of online educational materials about these options remain poorly understood.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To evaluate the availability, quality, and readability of online educational resources on interventional cancer pain management available from National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 65 NCI-designated clinical cancer center websites to identify patient-facing content discussing interventional cancer pain procedures. Eligible materials were evaluated for quality using the DISCERN instrument and for readability using seven validated metrics. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Statistical comparisons were performed using t-tests.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Only 20 of 65 cancer center websites (31%) contained relevant educational materials. Sixty qualifying texts were identified: 28 full articles and 32 substantial mentions (≥50 words). The mean DISCERN score was 37 ± 9, indicating poor quality. Articles scored significantly higher than substantial mentions (mean difference 9.4 points, p &lt; 0.001). The ICC for DISCERN scores was 0.872 (p &lt; 0.001), reflecting good inter-rater agreement. Readability analysis revealed an average reading level equivalent to the 11th grade across all metrics, significantly higher than the NIH-recommended 8th-grade level (p &lt; 0.001). Substantial mentions were significantly more difficult to read than articles (p &lt; 0.001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Online materials on cancer pain interventions are generally scarce, low in quality, and written above nationally recommended reading levels. These findings highlight the need for cancer centers to improve online education materials using plain language and health literacy tools to better support informed decision-making.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100633"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144878769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Mastering the GON Block: A practical four-step ultrasound-Guided approach","authors":"Mustafa Turgut Yildizgoren ,&nbsp;Hatice Ozeken ,&nbsp;Abdulkadir Bartu ,&nbsp;Fatih Bagcier","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100605","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100605","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100605"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144366641","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Corrigendum to “Genicular nerve block with corticosteroid for chronic knee Pain: Patient-Reported outcomes across 9-years of practice” [Intervent Pain Med 4 (2025) 100601]","authors":"Mingda Chen ,&nbsp;Sercan Tosun ,&nbsp;Nicolas R. Thompson ,&nbsp;Kush K. Goyal","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100602","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100602","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100602"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144471009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"ChatGPT and low back pain - Evaluating AI-driven patient education in the context of interventional pain medicine","authors":"Ahmed Basharat ,&nbsp;Rohan Shah ,&nbsp;Nick Wilcox ,&nbsp;Gurpaij Tur ,&nbsp;Siddarth Tripati ,&nbsp;Prisha Kansal ,&nbsp;Niveah Gandhi ,&nbsp;Sreekrishna Pokuri ,&nbsp;Gabby Chong ,&nbsp;Charles A. Odonkor ,&nbsp;Narayana Varhabhatla ,&nbsp;Robert Chow","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100636","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100636","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Background&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;ChatGPT and other Large Language Models (LLMs) are not only being more readily integrated into healthcare but are also being utilized more frequently by patients to answer health-related questions. Given the increased utilization for this purpose, it is essential to evaluate and study the consistency and reliability of artificial intelligence (AI) responses. Low back pain (LBP) remains one of the most frequently seen chief complaints in primary care and interventional pain management offices.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Objective&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;This study assesses the readability, accuracy, and overall utility of ChatGPT's ability to address patients' questions concerning low back pain. Our aim is to use clinician feedback to analyze ChatGPT's responses to these common low back pain related questions, as in the future, AI will undoubtedly play a role in triaging patients prior to seeing a physician.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Methods&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;To assess AI responses, we generated a standardized list of 25 questions concerning low back pain that were split into five categories including diagnosis, seeking a medical professional, treatment, self-treatment, and physical therapy. We explored the influence of how a prompt is worded on ChatGPT by asking questions from a 4th grader to a college/reference level. One board certified interventional pain specialist, one interventional pain fellow, and one emergency medicine resident reviewed ChatGPT's generated answers to assess accuracy and clinical utility. Readability and comprehensibility were evaluated using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Scale. Statistical analysis was performed to analyze differences in readability scores, word count, and response complexity.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Results&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;How a question is phrased influences accuracy in statistically significant ways. Over-simplification of queries (e.g. to a 4th grade level) degrades ChatGPT's ability to return clinically complete responses. In contrast, reference and neutral queries preserve accuracy without additional engineering. Regardless of how the question is phrased, ChatGPT's default register trends towards technical language. Readability remains substantially misaligned with health literacy standards. Verbosity correlates with prompt type, but not necessarily accuracy. Word count is an unreliable proxy for informational completeness or clinical correctness in AI outputs and most errors stem from omission, not commission. Importantly, ChatGPT does not frequently generate false claims.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;h3&gt;Conclusion&lt;/h3&gt;&lt;div&gt;This analysis complicates the assumption that “simpler is better” in prompting LLMs for clinical education. Whereas earlier work in structured conditions suggested that plain-language prompts improved accuracy, our findings indicate that a moderate reading level, not maximal simplicity, yields the most reliable outputs in complex domains like pain. This study further supports that AI LLMs can be integrated ","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100636"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144925777","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“Is this injection going to hurt?” Quantifying the pain experience during common lumbosacral spine injections","authors":"Asher Smuek ,&nbsp;Rishi Bakshi ,&nbsp;Romeo Mays ,&nbsp;Lisa Huynh ,&nbsp;Joshua Levin ,&nbsp;Joshua Rittenberg ,&nbsp;Matthew Smuck","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100632","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100632","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>“Is this injection going to hurt?” Physicians typically answer this from experience since accurate answers are not available in the literature.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To quantify pain during common lumbosacral spine injections and compare to baseline pain prior to the injections. Analyze differences based on demographic and procedure variables.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This is a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from a multicenter trial of patients undergoing bilateral symmetric transforaminal epidural (TFE), facet joint (FJ), or sacroiliac joint (SIJ) injections. Numeric pain ratings (0-10) were obtained at baseline in preop (“What is your current pain?”) and for each injection procedure (“How much did this injection hurt from start to finish?”) first on the right side then the left. Between group comparisons used Chi-squared and ANOVA for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. T-tests compared various pain responses, and multivariate regression determined factors associated with higher procedure pain.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 244 injections (124 TFE, 60 FJ, 60 SIJ) on 122 consecutive patients (mean age 57.2, 50 % female), age and BMI did not differ between injection groups while sex did (p = 0.001) with more FJ males and SIJ females. Mean baseline pain was statistically equivalent between demographic and injection groups. Mean procedure pain was consistently higher than mean baseline pain, however this difference was small and non-significant for TFE (4.0 vs 3.8) and FJ (3.9 vs 3.3), but larger and significant for SIJ (5.3 vs. 3.6; p = 0.0001). In the multivariate regression analysis only 2 variables remained associated with higher procedure pain, older age (p &lt; 0.0001) and SIJ injection group (p = 0.0021).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The majority of patients (79.1 %) report mild or moderate pain during common lumbosacral spine injections. The average procedure pain of 4.3 on the NPRS scale was only 0.7 points higher than baseline pain recorded in pre-op. Procedure pain from TFE and FJ injections is statistically equivalent to baseline pain and to each other, while SIJ injections produce higher procedure pain with a significant +1.7 point mean increase in pain from baseline. Finally, older adults report significantly greater procedure pain compared to those under 65 years old.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100632"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144866834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Dorsal root ganglion stimulation for multifactorial refractory foot pain: A case report","authors":"Hasan Sen,&nbsp;Amanda Cooper,&nbsp;Aaron Conger,&nbsp;Zachary L. McCormick,&nbsp;Allison Glinka Przybysz","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100614","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100614","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation has emerged as an effective, targeted neuromodulation therapy for refractory pain of the lower extremities, particularly in the setting of complex regional pain syndrome. However, preliminary evidence supporting DRG for other applications, such as peripheral neuropathy or refractory nociceptive pain, is currently limited to patient populations with discrete pain sources. We report a case of chronic, multifactorial foot pain successfully treated with a right S1 DRG stimulation after failure of multiple prior interventions including physical therapy, corticosteroid injections, and surgeries.</div></div><div><h3>Case report</h3><div>A 74-year-old male presented with chronic refractory right foot pain, diagnosed with L5-S1 radiculopathy, peripheral neuropathy, persistent post-surgical pain following multiple procedures, including partial toe pain, which significantly impaired his mobility and quality of life. DRG stimulation was pursued after multiple prior interventions, including physical therapy, corticosteroid injections, surgeries, and a trial of peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) that provided only temporary relief. Following a successful stimulation trial, a permanent DRG device was implanted at the S1 level, resulting in meaningful, sustained pain relief and functional improvement.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>DRG stimulation represents a promising treatment for refractory lower extremity pain, especially in cases where traditional therapies have failed. This case illustrates its therapeutic potential in patients with complex refractory neuropathic pain of mixed etiologies.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100614"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144633587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Safety profile of cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injections performed while maintaining anticoagulation, aspirin, or NSAIDs","authors":"David Levi ,&nbsp;Dustin Randall ,&nbsp;Scott Horn ,&nbsp;Austin Russo ,&nbsp;Josh Gabri ,&nbsp;Morgan Durand ,&nbsp;Joshua Levin","doi":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100618","DOIUrl":"10.1016/j.inpm.2025.100618","url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Summary of background data</h3><div>The risk of a symptomatic epidural bleed in patients continuing anticoagulation during most types of spinal injection procedures is extremely low. Cervical epidural steroid injections involve a unique risk of a catastrophic complication if an epidural hematoma is to occur secondary to spinal cord compression due to the anatomic confines of the cervical spinal canal. There is minimal research on the risk of cervical transforaminal epidural steroid injections (CTFESI) with anticoagulation.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Evaluate the risk of performing CTFESI with patients continuing prescribed anticoagulation medication.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A retrospective review was performed at two practice settings, a community-based outpatient practice and an academic practice, to identify all CTFESI performed between June 2018 through November 2023. Patient medical records were reviewed for the presence of anticoagulation and NSAID medication the day of the CTFESI. Data analysis used descriptive statistics to summarize the distribution of anticoagulants, NSAIDs, and cervical levels across practices, along with medication frequencies and percentages.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 2792 CTFESIs were performed across both settings between June 2018 and November 2023. Of those, 1040 CTFESIs (37.2 %) were performed on patients taking some form of anticoagulant medication. 277 CTFESI were performed on patients taking anticoagulants or aspirin or a combination of anticoagulants and ASA. 763 were performed on patients taking NSAIDs. There were no reported cases of symptomatic epidural hematomas or other bleeding complications in the immediate post-procedural period or up to 1 week following the procedure.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>It is likely that CTFESI can be safely performed in patients continuing anticoagulation, aspirin (ASA), or NSAIDs. Discontinuing anticoagulants or NSAIDs for CTFESIs may not be necessary. Further studies are warranted to confirm these results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100727,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Pain Medicine","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100618"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144696462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}