MEDIAL UNICOMPARTMENTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY WITH THE MILLER-GALANTE PROSTHESIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty has become a popular treatment alternative for osteoarthritis that is confined to the medial part of the knee. Excellent intermediate-term results recently have been reported in association with the Miller-Galante unicompartmental implant. The purpose of the present study was to report on our longer-term experience with the Miller-Galante medial unicompartmental knee implant. METHODS: We evaluated the results of 113 medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasties that had been performed with use of the Miller-Galante implant in eighty-four patients between 1989 and 2000. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was sixty-eight years. Forty-five patients were men, and thirty-nine were women. Thirteen patients (sixteen knees) died at a mean of seven years after the index arthroplasty. No patient was lost to follow-up. The remaining seventy-one patients (ninety-seven knees) were followed for a mean of ten years and were evaluated with use of the Knee Society clinical and radiographic rating system. RESULTS: Eleven knees were revised at a mean of four years after the index procedure. The mean Knee Society knee and function scores for the sixty-one patients (eighty-six knees) who were living and who had not had a revision improved from 48 and 53 points preoperatively to 93 and 80 points at the time of the most recent evaluation. The five and ten-year rates of survival were 94% and 90%, respectively, with revision to tricompartmental knee arthroplasty as the end point and 93% and 86%, respectively, with revision or radiographic loosening as the end point. CONCLUSIONS: The Miller-Galante medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty provided excellent pain relief and restoration of function in carefully selected patients and demonstrated durable implant survival at ten years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".