Intra‐articular Hyaluronan Following Autogenous Osteochondral Grafting of the Knee
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess whether intra-articular hyaluronan viscosupplementation after osteochondral grafting (mosaic arthroplasty) of the knee allowed better graft integration and function in a sheep model. TYPE OF STUDY: Experimental study. METHODS: Twelve adult sheep underwent a mosaic arthroplasty procedure to a standardized osteochondral defect on the medial femoral condyle. One week after surgery the animals were randomized to receive a course of weekly intra-articular injections for 5 weeks of either sodium-hyaluronate solution 25 mg/2.5 mL (HA group) or of a 2.5 mL buffer solution (control group). Synovial fluid samples were taken preoperatively, preceding each injection, and at 8 and 12 weeks. The animals were euthanized at 12 weeks, the knees dissected out, and biomechanical and histologic assessments were made. RESULTS: There was no difference in the synovial fluid leukocyte or total protein concentration between the groups, but the hyaluronan concentration was statistically higher in the HA group. Aggregate moduli of the articular surface were statistically higher in the graft articular cartilage in the HA group than in the control group, as were the sulphated glycosaminoglycan levels. Histologic assessment found more articular cartilage flow in the HA group, whereas there was more interstitial tissue present in the interstices between the grafts in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study suggest that hyaluronan viscosupplementation following osteochondral grafting does convey some beneficial effects on graft cartilage in the early postoperative period in an ovine model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study suggests that, in the early postoperative period, hyaluronan supplementation improves articular cartilage survival after osteochondral grafting.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".