Risk Factors for Peroneal Nerve Injury and Recovery in Knee Dislocation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute knee dislocation is rare but has a high rate of associated neurovascular injuries and potentially limb-threatening complications. These include the substantial morbidity associated with peroneal nerve injury: neuropathic pain, decreased mobility, and considerably reduced function, which not only impairs patient function but complicates treatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore identified and quantified the risks associated with specific factors for peroneal nerve injury and recovery in patients with knee dislocations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 26 patients, from among a cohort of all 91 knee dislocations, with a peroneal nerve palsy over a 5-year period. We then used univariable and multivariable statistics to identify risk factors predicting peroneal nerve injury and recovery. RESULTS: Gender (odds ratio, 5.47), body mass index (odds ratio, 1.14), and fibular head fracture (odds ratio, 4.77) were associated with peroneal nerve injury. Only younger age was associated with peroneal nerve recovery. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge of the risk factors for peroneal nerve injury and the predictors of recovery in knee dislocation allows the treating surgeon to have a better understanding of the nature of the neurologic injury and modify management based on the anticipated return of nerve function. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".