Rotational Malalignment of the Tibia Following Reamed Intramedullary Nail Fixation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and severity of tibial malrotation following reamed intramedullary nail fixation as measured by computerized tomography and to determine the repeatability of computed tomography measurement in the assessment of rotational malreduction. DESIGN: Prospective cohort. SETTINGS: Level 1 trauma center. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five consecutive patients with 25 tibial shaft fractures. INTERVENTION: All patients were treated with reamed intramedullary nailing. Appropriate radiographs and a postoperative lower extremity computed tomography scan were obtained for each patient who consented to the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Rotational alignment of affected tibia as compared to a version of the normal contralateral limb. Malrotation was defined as an internal/external rotation deformity greater than 10degrees. RESULTS: Malrotation, comparing the fractured limb to normal limb, was determined using a similar measurement method previously described in the literature. Two patients declined inclusion, and in one case, the computed tomography was not acceptable for analysis. Malrotation, comparing the fractured limb to the normal limb, was determined using the measurements from axial computed tomography images. Results revealed a mean absolute rotational difference of 6.7degrees (SD +/-6.3degrees). Rotational malreduction ranged from 15degrees of internal rotation to 22degrees of external rotation. Five of the 22 tibia (22%) were malrotated greater than 10degrees. A larger degree of deformity was seen with certain injury patterns. The intraobserver and interobserver repeatability testing revealed a mean absolute difference between paired malrotation calculations of 3.4degrees and 3.9degrees, respectively, and a repeatability coefficient of 8degrees for both. CONCLUSION: Computed tomography measurement is a repeatable method of assessing tibial torsion and in this study revealed a significantly higher incidence of rotational malreduction than that previously reported in the literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".