ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2026
Ultrasound-guided cranial multifidus cervicis plane block in dogs: a cadaveric study.
Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Management of pain in the canine cervical spine is a challenge where regional anesthesia of the cervical dorsal branches via an interfascial plane approach can improve multimodal analgesia. This study aimed to describe the ultrasound-guided multifidus cervicis plane (US-MCP) approach in dogs and evaluate its distribution and nerve staining. Methods: An anatomical and sonoanatomical study was followed by an experimental phase using 15 ultrasound-guided injections performed at the C3 level (0.3 mL kg Results: Sonoanatomical landmarks were consistently identified in all cases. CT contrast spread reached the C1-C2 levels cranially and C4-C5 caudally in most cases. Contrast distribution reached the dorsal midline in 12/15 injections. Epidural migration occurred in 4/15 cases, mainly at the C2-C3 level. Dissection confirmed accurate interfascial deposition in all specimens. Nerve staining was 100% effective (15/15) for the dorsal branches of C2 and C3 and 60% in the case of C4 (9/15). However, success rates decreased caudally and staining was observed in 13.3% (2/15) of C5 nerves, and was absent (0/15) at C6. Conclusion: The described US-guided MCP approach is a feasible and highly specific technique for the desensitization of the cranial dorsal cervical region. Consistent staining of the C2 and C3 dorsal branches, and potentially C4, supports its potential as a promising tool for integration into multimodal analgesia protocols. Clinical studies are required to evaluate its safety and analgesic efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.