Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In patients with unicompartmental medial knee arthritis, medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy is used to shift the mechanical weightbearing line laterally to reduce pain and improve function. There have been concerns that opening wedge high tibial osteotomy is associated with a reduction of patellar height and increase in the sagittal posterior tibial slope, both of which can adversely affect the final result. HYPOTHESIS: A more distal oblique osteotomy at the level of insertion of the patellar tendon should decrease these effects when compared with a horizontal osteotomy made proximal to the patellar tendon insertion. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Review of 22 horizontal and 19 oblique high tibial osteotomies with a mean follow-up of 4.2 +/- 1.8 years (mean +/- SD) was performed. Anatomic tibiofemoral angle, mechanical weightbearing line, medial coronal tibial plateau angle, patellar height (Blackburne and Peel ratio), and sagittal tibial slope were measured. RESULTS: In both groups, the weightbearing line was equally shifted toward the center of the plateau. In the horizontal group, the Blackburne and Peel ratio decreased from 0.85 +/- 0.16 to 0.67 +/- 0.12, and the sagittal tibial slope was increased from 7.7 degrees +/- 4.6 degrees to 10.7 degrees +/- 3.8 degrees (P < .001). In comparison, the oblique group did not show any significant postoperative changes for these 2 parameters. In the oblique group, 2 patients sustained loss of correction and early failure when the osteotomy remained below the metaphyseal flare on the lateral cortex. CONCLUSION: The oblique osteotomy group showed more normalized postoperative sagittal tibial slope and patellar height. Caution should be exercised not to osteotomize too distally.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".