Creep Behavior of a Rabbit Model of Ligament Laxity after Electrothermal Shrinkage in Vivo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deformation of capsular tissue under constant load (creep) may lead to recurrent laxity after thermal shrinkage for shoulder instability. We investigated the effects of thermal shrinkage in a rabbit model in which the tibial insertion of the medial collateral ligament was elevated and shifted toward the joint line to create abnormal laxity. On the right side, radiofrequency electrothermal energy was applied to the shifted ligament, while the left side served as a control. Length, laxity, mass, cross-sectional area, water content, and creep behavior of the ligament were assessed at 0 (N = 8), 3 (N = 7), and 12 (N = 6) weeks postoperatively. Laxity was reduced with thermal treatment (0.65 +/- 0.31 compared with 3.33 +/- 0.25 mm). After 3 weeks, ligament mass, area, and water content were significantly increased in the thermally treated group compared with the untreated controls. At 12 weeks, cyclic creep strain remained greater than that in controls (1.25% +/- 0.65% compared with 0.93% +/- 0.22%). Although thermal shrinkage reduced laxity, there was increased potential to creep and failure at low physiologic stresses. These findings suggest that loading of thermally treated tissues should be carefully controlled during the early phase of rehabilitation after surgery.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".