Prospective clinical and radiographic results of CHARITÉ III artificial total disc arthroplasty at 2- to 7-year follow-up: a Canadian experience.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early and intermediate results have shown that the SB CHARITÉ III total disc arthroplasty (TDA) favourably compares to spinal fusion, but is associated with fewer complications and higher levels of satisfaction. We sought to prospectively report the clinical and radiographic results of the CHARITÉ III TDA after an average of 55 months follow-up. METHODS: We conducted a prospective study of patients receiving the CHARITÉ TDA at either L4-5 or L5-S1 between April 2001 and November 2006. The primary indication for surgery was discogenic low-back pain confirmed by provocative discography. Assessment included pre- and postoperative (3, 6 and 12 mo and yearly thereafter) validated patient outcome measures and radiographic review. RESULTS: Fifty-seven of the potential 64 (89%) patients were available for complete follow-up. Their mean age was 39 (range 21-59) years. A statistically significant improvement was demonstrated between all the mean pre- and postoperative intervals for the Oswestry Disability Index, visual analogue scale for back and leg pain, and Short Form-36 health survey (p < 0.001). The mean sagittal rotation was 6.5° (range 0.5°-22.4°), and the mean intervertebral translation was 1.1 mm (range 0-2.4 mm). Subsidence of the implant was present in 44 of 53 (83%) patients with an L5-S1 disc arthroplasty. The mean subsidence was 1.7 mm (range 0-4.8 mm). CONCLUSION: The 2- to 7-year follow-up of this cohort of patients demonstrated satisfactory clinical and radiographic results in a carefully selected patient population. The radiographic assessment confirmed preservation and maintenance of motion at the replaced disc during the period of follow-up.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".