MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971293048 · doi:10.1007/s00167-008-0551-9

Relationship between the surgical epicondylar axis and the articular surface of the distal femur: an anatomic study

2008· article· en· W1971293048 on OpenAlexaff
Sébastien Lustıg, Frédéric Lavoie, Tarik Aït Si Selmi, Elvire Servıen, Philippe Neyret

Bibliographic record

VenueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalHôpital Notre-Dame
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondyleSagittal planeFemurRadiographyAnatomyScrew axisPerpendicularNuclear medicineMedicineGeometryMathematicsRadiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many authors presented the epicondylar axis as the fixed axis of rotation of the femoral condyles during flexion of the knee. Positioning of the femoral component of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) based on the epicondyles has been proposed. This work is a critical analysis of this concept. Metallic bodies were inserted at the level of collateral ligament insertions on 16 dried femurs, allowing us to locate the surgical epicondylar axis. The dried femurs were studied using standard radiographs and CT-scan. CT cuts were made perpendicular to the epicondylar axis. The medial mechanical femoral angle and the epicondylar angle were measured on the radiographs. The posterior and distal epiphyseal rotations relative to the epicondylar axis (Posterior Condylar Angle, PCA, and Distal Condylar Angle, DCA, respectively) were measured on the CT-scans. PCA and DCA values were compared. The centre of the posterior femoral condyles was located on sagittal reconstructions using the tangent method and was confirmed with circular templates, and then compared to the location of the epicondyles. Circle-fitting of the entire femoral condylar contours centred on the epicondyles was also tried. The mechanical femoral axis was nearly perpendicular to the epicondylar axis but with important variations. The average PCA and DCA were 1.9 degrees +/- 1.8 degrees and 3.1 degrees +/- 2.1 degrees , respectively. No relationship could be established between the mechanical femoral angle and the PCA. The individual differences between the PCA and the DCA averaged 2.2 degrees . A significant distance was found between the centre of the condylar contours and the epicondyles: 6.5 mm in average on the lateral side (range 2.3-11.3 mm) and 8.4 mm on the medial side (range 4.0-11.6 mm). Circle-fitting of the entire medial or lateral femoral condylar contours centred on the epicondyles was not possible. The centre of the posterior femoral condyles is significantly different from the epicondylar axis, thus refuting the conclusions of previous authors. Furthermore, considering the differences between the distal and posterior condylar angles shown here, as well as the difficulty of repeatably locating the epicondyles during surgery, using the epicondylar axis as the only landmark to position the femoral component during a first intention TKA is not recommended. The surgical epicondylar axis does not appear to be an adequate basis for the understanding of the shape of the distal femur.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations55
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnee Surgery Sports Traumatology ArthroscopySame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207