Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid to long-term clinicoradiological results of open wedge high tibial osteotomy performed as the primary treatment for medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee and to analyze the factors that affect the survival rate. Materials and Methods: The study cohort consisted of 124 patients who underwent open wedge high tibial osteotomy for medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis of the knee and had a minimum follow-up period of five years. Hospital for special surgery (HSS) and the Western Ontario and MacMaster (WOMAC) scores, tibiofemoral angle, mechanical axis of lower limb, medial proximal tibia angle, and tibia posterior slope angle were used to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes over the mean follow-up period of 85 months. The risk factors that affected the survival rate were calculated by multivariate regression analysis. Results: Mean HSS scores and WOMAC scores showed significant improvements at the final follow-up. The tibiofemoral angle was improved to 8.4 degrees of valgus after surgery. A total of 12 patients (9.7%) failed to survive until the final follow-up resulting in 8 year survivorship of 90.3%. Risk factors significantly affecting the survival rate afteropen wedge high tibial osteotomy included a high body mass index (BMI), severe varus deformity, severe osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence Grade III or IV) preoperatively and overcorrection angles in operation. Conclusion: Open wedge high tibial osteotomy showed good clinical and radiological outcomes in the current study. Analysis of the risk factors influencing survivorship after open wedge high tibial osteotomy suggests that the surgical procedure be avoided or modified with patients who have a high BMI, severe varus deformity, or severe osteoarthritis symptoms preoperatively.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".