Causes for failure of ACL reconstruction and influence of meniscectomies after revision
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
The purpose of this multicenter retrospective study was to analyze the causes for failure of ACL reconstruction and the influence of meniscectomies after revision. This study was conducted over a 12-year period, from 1994 to 2005 with ten French orthopaedic centers participating. Assessment included the objective International Knee Documenting Committee (IKDC) 2000 scoring system evaluation. Two hundred and ninety-three patients were available for statistics. Untreated laxity, femoral and tibial tunnel malposition, impingement, failure of fixation were assessed, new traumatism and infection were recorded. Meniscus surgery was evaluated before, during or after primary ACL reconstruction, and then during or after revision ACL surgery. The main cause for failure of ACL reconstruction was femoral tunnel malposition in 36% of the cases. Forty-four percent of the patients with an anterior femoral tunnel as a cause for failure of the primary surgery were IKDC A after revision versus 24% if the cause of failure was not the femoral tunnel (P = 0.05). A 70% meniscectomy rate was found in revision ACL reconstruction. Comparison between patients with a total meniscectomy (n = 56) and patients with preserved menisci (n = 65) revealed a better functional result and knee stability in the non-meniscectomized group (P = 0.04). This study shows that the anterior femoral tunnel malposition is the main cause for failure in ACL reconstruction. This reason for failure should be considered as a predictive factor of good result of revision ACL reconstruction. Total meniscectomy jeopardizes functional result and knee stability at follow-up.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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