Instrument breakage as a complication of elbow arthroscopy in a dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CASE REPORT: We describe an unusual complication of a routine arthroscopic procedure to treat fragmentation of the medial portion of the coronoid process in a 1-year-old Labrador Retriever. While the lesion was being curetted, the tip of the arthroscopic curette broke off. Attempts were made to remove it, but failed, and the broken fragment migrated out of the arthroscopic field. Conversion from arthroscopy to arthrotomy was unsuccessful. On intraoperative radiographs, the metallic fragment was detected in the radial fossa of the humeral condyle. A limited surgical approach to this area, guided by ultrasound, also proved ineffective. Finally, the broken curette tip was left in situ. The dog made an uneventful recovery and 6 months after surgery it showed no lameness except after rest and there was no evidence of migration of the metallic fragment on radiographs. CONCLUSIONS: On such occasions, we recommend: (1) stop both the inflow and outflow of fluids; (2) attempt arthroscopic retrieval with a magnetic retriever and large forceps; (3) use diagnostic imaging to localise the broken fragment if it migrates out of the arthroscopic field; and (4) leave in situ if it is no longer accessible to arthroscopic extraction. This is the first report of an instrument breakage during arthroscopy in a dog.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| 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; 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".