Surgical Treatment of a Displaced Lateral Malleolus Fracture: The Antiglide Technique Versus Lateral Plate Fixation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the outcomes of the surgical management of "isolated" displaced lateral malleolar fractures, comparing the techniques of lateral plating and antiglide plating as described previously. DESIGN: This is a retrospective review, being largely a surgeon-randomized comparative study. SETTING: The study was carried out at a university teaching hospital that serves as a provincial trauma referral service and provides local community care. The senior surgeons are all orthopaedic trauma subspecialists. PATIENTS: A total of 193 patients meeting our inclusion criteria, with isolated lateral malleolus fractures surgically treated at the Vancouver General Hospital between 1987 and 1998, were studied. INTERVENTION: Eighty-five were treated with antiglide plating, whereas the remaining 108 patients underwent traditional lateral plating. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The functional results were evaluated with the ankle scoring system described previously. We also compared the complication rates, including failure of fixation, infection, wound dehiscence, and need for hardware removal. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable for age, sex distribution, mechanism of injury, and occupation. There was no difference in ankle score, function, and infection rate. The incidence of wound dehiscence and reoperation for hardware removal was slightly higher in the lateral plate group, but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of the surgical management of a displaced lateral malleolus fracture is comparable with both techniques. Although few studies have reported some advantages using the antiglide technique, our data do not support one technique over the other.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it