MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966237145 · doi:10.1503/cjs.003513

Viability assessment of the chondral flap in patients with cam-type femoroacetabular impingement: a preliminary report

2014· article· en· W1966237145 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Brad Meulenkamp, Denis Gravel, Paul E. Beaulé

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFibrocartilageCartilageFemoroacetabular impingementHyaline cartilageChondrocyteArthroscopySurgeryOsteoarthritisAnatomyPathologyArticular cartilage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Delaminated acetabular cartilage is a common finding in patients undergoing surgical dislocation or hip arthroscopy in the treatment of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement. Current treatment involves resection of the free cartilage flap with or without acetabular rim trimming. The viability of the delaminated cartilage flap is not known. We sought to examine if the acetabular cartilage still has viable cartilage cells and, if so, what type of cartilage is present. METHODS: We examined the delaminated cartilage flaps from patients undergoing surgical dislocation and osteochondroplasty for symptomatic cam-type impingement. We performed hematoxylin and eosin staining and histological analysis using light microscopy to determine cartilage viability and cartilage type. RESULTS: We examined 12 delaminated cartilage flaps from 11 patients (10 men, 1 woman, average age 30.1 yr). Ninety percent chondrocyte viability was confirmed in 11 of 12 flaps. Six of 12 flaps were composed predominantly of hyaline cartilage, 4 were a mixed population of fibrocartilage and hyaline cartilage and 2 were predominantly fibrocartilage. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the delaminated cartilage flap in patients with femoroacetabular impingement may retain a large amount of viable chondrocytes. Development of surgical techniques focusing on refixation of this flap as an alternative to excision and microfracture should be considered.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of SurgerySame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207