MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984914244 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2010.08.015

Impact of Tibial and Femoral Tunnel Position on Clinical Results After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction

2010· article· en· W1984914244 on OpenAlex
Patrick Sadoghi, A. Kröpfl, Volkmar Jansson, Peter E. Müller, Matthias F. Pietschmann, M. F. Fischmeister

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnterior cruciate ligamentAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionNuclear medicineOrthopedic surgeryArthroscopySurgeryOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to correlate anatomic and nonanatomic tibial and femoral tunnel positions after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with clinical outcome by use of bone-patellar tendon-bone (BPTB) single-bundle (SB) and semitendinosus-gracilis (STG) double-bundle (DB) techniques. METHODS: The 3-dimensional computed tomography scans of 53 patients' knees (27 BPTB-SB and 26 STG-DB) were prepared and measured by 2 examiners according to their tibial and femoral tunnel positions. We evaluated these radiologic constructions and measurements by use of the Cohen κ interobserver and intraobserver coefficient for 2 observers. Patients undergoing both techniques were divided into anatomic and nonanatomic reconstructions according to the findings of Zantop and Petersen. We correlated anatomically and nonanatomically reconstructed patients with clinical outcome by the Tegner score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, International Knee Documentation Committee score, KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), and pivot-shift test in both techniques. RESULTS: The radiologic constructions and measurements of 53 computed tomography scans were achieved with a good agreement of interobserver and intraobserver coefficients for 2 observers. We found significantly superior clinical outcome in anatomic ACL reconstructions in both techniques in terms of higher clinical scores (Tegner and International Knee Documentation Committee), higher anterior posterior stability, and less pivot shift. We observed the best outcome in anatomic STG-DB reconstructions. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation showed that better clinical results are associated with anatomic ACL reconstructions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study.

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.397

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.312 · 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