The Effect of Electrocautery around the Patellar Rim in Patellar Non-Resurfacing Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical effect of electrocautery on the reduction of pain in patellar non-resurfacing bilateral total knee arthroplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 patients were enrolled into this study; all patients had undergone bilateral patellar non-resurfacing total knee arthoplasty at our hospital, between January 2007 to December 2008. The minimum follow-up period was 1 year. The electrocautery of the patellar rim was performed randomly on one side only. The clinical results were evaluated between the electrocautery group and the non-electrocautery group based on measures of anterior knee pain, range of motion, American Knee Society clinical rating score, Feller knee score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities score, and radiographic analysis. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between preoperative and postoperative status for all parameters. There were no statistically significant differences noted between the electrocautery group and the non electrocautery group for all parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Electrocautery of patellar rim is thought to be less effective in reducing anterior knee pain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".