Management of Tibial Bony Defect with Metal Block in Primary Total Knee Replacement Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To analyze minimum 2-year clinical and radiological follow-up results of primary total knee replacement arthroplasty (TKRA) with metal block augmentation for tibial bony defect. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 67 cases (52 patients) of primary TKRA with metal block augmentation for tibial bony defects from March 1999 and March 2008. Clinical results were evaluated using the Knee Society clinical rating system and the Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) score. Radiologic results were evaluated using the Knee Society roentgenographic evaluation system. RESULTS: The mean knee score and function score improved from 42.0 and 45.6 preoperatively to 94.5 and 85.4 postoperatively. At last follow-up, the mean WOMAC score was 16.8. The incidence of radiolucent lines was 10% (7 cases) during the follow-up period, but there was no case of progression. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups divided according to the block size (below 5 mm and over 8 mm) and between the stem and no-stem groups for all parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Primary TKRA with a metal block produced satisfactory results for the minimum 2-year follow-up and can be considered as a simple and effective method for the treatment of tibial bony defect in primary TKRA.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".