MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1641042443 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2015.03.026

The Apex of the Deep Cartilage: A Landmark and New Technique to Help Identify Femoral Tunnel Placement in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2015· article· en· W1641042443 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Hart, Yung Han, Paul A. Martineau

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCadaveric spasmAnterior cruciate ligamentFootprintCadaverFemurAnatomyFEMORAL CONDYLEDrillArthroscopyOrthodonticsSurgeryGeologyCartilageMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the apex of the deep cartilage (ADC) as a landmark to help guide femoral tunnel placement during anatomic single-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. Our secondary purpose was to assess whether or not the endoscopic transtibial femoral offset drill guide could reach the center of the ACL's femoral footprint. METHODS: Eight formalin-injected cadaveric knees were dissected and the center of the ACL femoral footprints identified. The ADC was selected as an easily identifiable landmark during arthroscopy and was used to reference the position of the ACL femoral footprint with the knee flexed at 90°. Next, a 7-mm transtibial femoral ACL drill guide was used to engage the posterior aspect of the lateral condyle at the level of the femoral footprint. This position was marked, and the distance from the center of the femoral footprint was recorded for each specimen. Descriptive statistics were used to report our measurements. RESULTS: The median high and shallow measurements were 3 mm (range, 1 to 4 mm) and 12 mm (range, 11 to 17 mm), respectively. The femoral offset guide never reached the center of the femoral footprint in all specimens; the median distance between the 2 measurements was 4.5 mm (range, 2 to 9 mm). CONCLUSIONS: If the anatomy is difficult to delineate at the time of reconstruction, our study suggests using the ADC as a landmark to guide anatomic placement. The dissection of 8 cadavers showed that the center of the ACL femoral footprint had a median position of 3 mm high and 12 mm shallow to the ADC. We also showed that the transtibial femoral offset guide did not reach the center of the ACL footprint on all specimens and should therefore not be used for anatomic ACL reconstruction. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Current commercially available transtibial femoral offset guides cannot reach the center of the ACL's femoral footprint and therefore should not be used. Alternative techniques, such as referencing from the ADC through an anteromedial (AM) portal, are recommended.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations41
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207