Podotrochlear Bursa Endoscopy in the Horse: A Cadaver Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate podotrochlear bursa (navicular bursa) endoscopy as a diagnostic technique in horses and to correlate observations to radiographic and pathologic findings. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive study. SAMPLE POPULATION: Seventeen equine cadaver forelimbs. METHODS: Five standard radiographic views of the navicular region and a bursographic study with lateromedial and caudal tangential radiographic views were taken of each forelimb. Radiographic scoring of the navicular bone (0, excellent; 1, good; 2, fair; 3, poor) was performed using a previously reported technique. Endoscopic examination was performed using a 30 degrees wide-angle forward oblique-viewing, 4-mm outside diameter (OD), arthroscope. Four examiners using recorded videotapes made independent evaluations of bursal endoscopy. The specimens were then dissected and examined to verify radiographic and endoscopic findings. RESULTS: The distribution of radiographic scores (RS) were 0 (5 limbs), 1 (7), 2 (2), and 3 (3). Abnormal endoscopic findings (fibrillation of the deep digital flexor tendon, a defect in the navicular bone fibrocartilage, and synovial hyperplasia) were identified in 3 limbs (2 with an RS of 1, and 1 with an RS of 3). The endoscopic observations made in the two RS 1 bursae were not confirmed on gross examination, whereas they were in the RS 3 specimen, which also had the only abnormal bursogram. Evaluation of the bursa on the side ipsilateral to the arthroscope portal was difficult. Complications of the technique included inadvertent penetration of the distal interphalangeal joint and the digital sheath, and superficial scoring of the navicular bone fibrocartilage. CONCLUSIONS: Podotrochlear bursa endoscopy is feasible and may be a useful technique in identifying early abnormalities associated with podotrochleosis. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In horses with podotrochleosis, endoscopic examination of the podotrochlear bursa may improve identification of pathologic changes within the bursa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".