MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097207553

What's new in orthopedics--part II.

2003· article· en· W2097207553 on OpenAlexaffabout
Greg Harasen

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsRegina General HospitalUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrthopedic surgeryCruciate ligamentMedicineJoint diseaseTraumatologyLigamentLamenessSurgeryAnterior cruciate ligamentGeneral surgeryOsteoarthritisPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first World Veterinary Orthopedic Congress was held September 5th to 8th, 2002, in Munich, Germany, as a joint meeting between the European Society of Veterinary Orthopedics and Traumatology and its North American sister organization, the Veterinary Orthopedic Society. The Congress attracted almost 400 delegates from 32 countries and featured over 150 lectures, papers, and laboratory sessions. Orthopedic surgeons can seemingly never gather without extensive discussion of cranial cruciate ligament (CCL) rupture in the dog, and this Congress was no exception. Data were presented indicating that more than 70% of CCL ruptures are nontraumatic (1). It has been recognized for some time that CCL rupture in some dogs occurs as the culmination of a long-term degenerative process in the stifle joint. This retrospective study suggests that 11% of these nontraumatic injuries are partial ligament tears, and that higher standing stifle angles (“straight-legged” conformation) and obesity are predisposing factors to CCL injury. The tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO), a technique developed more than 2 decades ago by Slocum as a treatment for CCL rupture (2), may finally be shedding its “controversial” label. Slocum's initial work with the procedure involved patenting the technique; thus restricting its teaching and the accumulation of clinical data. The data that might have taken only 5 y to generate are only now becoming available after 20 y. While there remains debate over how and why the technique is effective, there is little dispute that the TPLO does work, that it decreases long-term degenerative joint disease, and, consequently, that it may be the treatment of choice, especially in large breed dogs (3). The TPLO procedure is based on the leveling of the tibial plateau to eliminate the cranial tibial thrust produced by axial loading of the CCL-deficient stifle. A radial osteotomy of the proximal extremity of the tibia is made as one looks at the stifle in the mediolateral plane. The proximal fragment of the tibia is then rotated so as to level the cranial to caudal slope of the tibial plateau. The osteotomy is then fixed with a specialized bone plate and screws. The results of over 20 000 TPLO procedures at several institutions worldwide, which continue to provide positive results on the procedure's efficacy, were presented to Congress delegates. However, results do not suggest that other techniques should be abandoned. Data were presented showing that 6 mo postoperatively, weight-bearing in 68 Labrador retrievers, as measured by force plate analysis, was not significantly different between TPLO repairs and extracapsular repairs (5). Information was presented on the management of partial CCL tears that cast doubt on the wisdom of handling such cases with a conservative “wait and see” approach (6). Without surgical stabilization, complete rupture was found to be a virtual inevitability. The TPLO procedure was shown to prevent partial tears from becoming complete ruptures and to dramatically decrease degenerative joint disease, as compared with joints treated conservatively. The partial CCL tears were confirmed arthroscopically by the authors before they proceeded with TPLO. While hip replacement surgery in the dog has become commonplace at academic and referral institutions worldwide, the replacement of other troublesome joints, specifically the elbow and stifle, has been slower in progressing. Research in both these areas was presented at the Congress (7,8). A prosthetic elbow joint appears to be close to commercial production, but it will likely be some years yet before elbow and stifle replacements are commonly available.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.026

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207