Effect of Medial Meniscal Release on Tibial Translation After Tibial Plateau Leveling Osteotomy
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
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the biomechanical effects of medial meniscal release (MMR) and medial, caudal pole hemimeniscectomy (MCH) on joint stability in the cranial cruciate ligament (CCL)-deficient canine stifle before and after tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO). STUDY DESIGN: Experimental study. ANIMALS: Thirty-one dogs. METHODS: In experiment 1, 16 pairs of normal hindlimbs randomly assigned to an intact or transected CCL group were studied to determine the magnitude of tibial translation after MMR and MCH under 20% body weight load using radiographic imaging of radio-opaque markers. In experiment 2, 15 pairs of CCL-deficient hindlimbs were randomly assigned to a TPLO or sham TPLO group. The remainder of the experiment was performed as described for experiment 1. The effect of CCL transection, MMR, MCH and TPLO were analyzed using 2-way repeated measures ANOVA; P<.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: We found a greater effect of MMR on tibial translation in transected CCL stifles than in intact stifles (P=.0016). We found no further effect of MCH after MMR (P>.05). We found a greater effect of MMR in sham TPLO than TPLO stifles (P=.0013) but no further effect of MCH after MMR (P>.05). CONCLUSIONS: By resisting tibial translation the medial meniscus might be at greater risk of tearing in CCL-deficient stifles. TPLO may spare the medial meniscus by neutralizing the tibial thrust and eliminating the wedge effect of the medial meniscus. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MMR may not be indicated in the CCL-deficient stifle stabilized by TPLO.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it