Outcome of osteochondral autograft transplantation for type-V cystic osteochondral lesions of the talus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus has evolved with the development of improved imaging and arthroscopic techniques. However, the outcome of treatment for large cystic type-V lesions is poor, using conventional grafting, debridement or microfracture techniques. This retrospective study examined the outcomes of 50 patients with a cystic talar defect who were treated with arthroscopically harvested, cored osteochondral graft taken from the ipsilateral knee. Of the 50 patients, 45 (90%) had a mean good to excellent score of 80.3 (52 to 90) in the Karlsson-Peterson Ankle Score, at a mean follow-up of 36 months (24 to 83). A malleolar osteotomy for exposure was needed in 26 patients and there were no malleolar mal- or nonunions. One patient had symptoms at the donor site three months after surgery; these resolved after arthroscopic release of scar tissue. This technique is demanding with or without a malleolar osteotomy, but if properly performed has a high likelihood of success.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".