MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1611132386

Artrodese parcial tarsometatársica com uso de fixador esquéletico externo circular em cão

2013· article· pt· W1611132386 on OpenAlexaff
Cássio Ricardo Auada Ferrigno, Vanessa Couto de Magalhães Ferraz, Olicies da Cunha, Aline Schafrum Macedo, Ísis dos Santos Dal‐Bó, Tatiana Casimiro Mariani, Marcos Ishimoto Della Nina, Kelly Cristiane Ito Yamauchi

Bibliographic record

VenueACTA SCIENTIAE VETERINARIAE · 2013
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTarsometatarsal jointsDeglovingTarsus (eyelids)SurgeryMetatarsal bonesArthrodesisReduction (mathematics)Kirschner wireRadiographyAnatomyInternal fixation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Trauma to the canine foot may result in injury to soft tissue or bone or both. Foot injury often results in fractures and joint instability because of disruption to carpal or tarsal ligaments. Several fi xation methods have been described for stabilizing tarsometatarsal arthrodesis. The aim of this paper is to report the case of a unilateral tarsometatarsal arthrodesis with use of circular skeletal fi xator on the left pelvic limb of a dog. Case: A 5-year-old intact male dog weighting 25 kg was referred to the veterinary hospital with a left tarsal degloving injury. The previous history revealed that the dog had been bitten by another dog seven days prior to the referral. On physical exam it had swelling and severe pain on the left foot, crepitus of the intertarsal/tarsometatarsal region, instability, bone exposure and myiasis larvae on the wound. The dog was non-weight-bearing on the affected limb. No other abnormalities were found. Radiographs revealed it to be an open fracture of the left tarsal distal line with tarsometatarsal luxation. Adherent dressings were changed for seven days to minimize the contamination before surgery. The dog was treated by open reduction and internal fi xation using a circular skeletal fi xator. After general anesthesia was induced, a lateral approach to the tarsometatarsal joint was made. The tarsometatarsal joint then was exposed. Articular cartilage was removed with a pneumatic burr. Manual reduction was performed. There were placed two rings proximal to the fracture and one distal with Kirschner wires were angled 45° between them through the bone. One of them was a semi-ring in the shape of a horseshoe. The 1,5 mm Kirschner wires were tensioned by a dynamometer loaded at 30 kg. For wound closure a free skin graft from the thorax was used. Articular anchylosis was reached in three months but the implant removal was posterior to that time due to the owner’s choice. Discussion: Traumatic injury is the most important cause for fracture and instability of the tarsometatarsal joint and was the cause of injury for this case. Partial arthrodesis is considered the treatment of choice for tarsal instabilities with ligament disruption. Implant problems following union can complicate arthrodeses stabilized with internal fi xation, and they may require a second surgery for implant removal. In this case the size of the rings conformed well to the proximal tarsus, and allowed suffi cient space for wire placement in the metatarsal bones and did not interfere with ambulation. The dog recovered good limb function soon after the surgery and articular anchylosis was reached within three months as expected. In a study three of ten dogs undergoing tarsometatarsal arthrodesis due to continued lameness after bony union, using a laterally applied plate required a second surgery for implant removal. Implant failure is a common complication of tarsocrural and tarsometatarsal arthrodeses stabilized with bone screws, Steinmann pins or plate fi xation. Tarsometatarsal partial arthrodesis with use of circular skeletal fi xator is a proper option for contaminated wounds without enough skin for closure. The limiting factor is the surgeon experience for this choice of fimaterial availability and the owner’s commitment with the treatment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACTA SCIENTIAE VETERINARIAESame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207