MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083024074 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2007.10.014

The Use of Hylan G‐F 20 After Knee Arthroscopy in an Active Patient Population With Knee Osteoarthritis

2008· article· en· W2083024074 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick M. Zietz, Harlan Selesnick

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisWOMACArthroscopyPhysical therapyPopulationProspective cohort studySurgeryKnee arthroscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of hylan G-F 20 when used to treat an active and athletic patient population with knee osteoarthritis who had undergone knee arthroscopy for mechanical symptoms. METHODS: We performed a prospective evaluation of patients who underwent knee arthroscopy for mechanical symptoms. All patients had Outerbridge grade III or IV changes to their articular cartilage. If patients complained of residual pain or activity limitations postoperatively that was believed to be from osteoarthritis, they were treated with a series of hylan G-F 20 consisting of 3 weekly injections. International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores are reported for the time immediately before arthroscopy, at the time of the first hylan G-F 20 injection (baseline), at 3 months postoperatively, and at 6 months postoperatively. In addition, activity scores were calculated from a subset of the IKDC questionnaire before arthroscopy, at baseline, and at 3 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifteen patients completed 6 months' follow-up. Baseline and 3- and 6-month IKDC and WOMAC scores were significantly improved compared with before arthroscopy. There was no significant difference in 3- and 6-month scores compared with baseline. The activity scores at baseline and at 3 months showed significant improvement compared with before arthroscopy. The activity scores also showed significant improvement at 3 months compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Hylan G-F 20 injections allow for improved activity levels at 3 months' follow-up. There was not a significant benefit of the injections when IKDC and WOMAC scores were evaluated. Hylan G-F 20 may be more beneficial for those patients who desire to increase their activity level rather than those who wish to decrease their pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207