Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Complicating Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the long-term outcome of patients diagnosed with complex regional pain syndrome-type 1 (CRPS-1) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with those of uncomplicated TKA knees and preoperative osteoarthritic knees. METHODS: Medical records of 1280 patients who underwent TKA for osteoarthritis were retrospectively reviewed; 8 were diagnosed as having symptoms and signs consistent with CRPS after TKA. Patients with primary inflammatory arthritis, signs of component loosening, malpositioning, or of infected arthroplasty were excluded. No patient had signs of CRPS prior to operative intervention. The 8 patients were compared with 2 groups of age- and sex-matched controls: uncomplicated TKA knees and preoperative osteoarthritic knees. Patients were followed up for a mean of 54 (range, 13-111) months and their range of movement, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, SF-36 questionnaire scores, and Knee Society scores were assessed and compared. RESULTS: After appropriate treatment, most CRPS complicated patients had similar scores on SF-36, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and Knee Society scores when compared with uncomplicated TKA patients. Scores for CRPS complicated patients were significantly improved when compared with preoperative osteoarthritic patients. The incidence of CRPS after TKA was 0.7%. CONCLUSION: When managed early, patients complicated with CRPS after TKA have a similar prognosis to patients with uncomplicated TKA.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".