MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115821423 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2008.09.010

Cyclic Load and Failure Behavior of Arthroscopic Knots and High Strength Sutures

2008· article· en· W2115821423 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Sutures and Adhesives
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersArthrex
KeywordsKnot (papermaking)Knot tyingMedicineSlippageRotator cuffSlip (aerodynamics)SurgeryAnatomyOrthodonticsStructural engineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsComposite materialEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To compare the biomechanical performance of several different sutures by evaluating knot security and load to failure strength using different arthroscopic knots. METHODS: Eight different No. 2 sutures (Ethibond [Ethicon, Somerville, NJ], FiberWire [Arthrex, Naples, FL], Orthocord [DePuy-Mitek, Norwood, MA], Hi-Fi [ConMed Linvatec, Largo, FL], Ultrabraid [Smith & Nephew, Andover, MA], ForceFiber [Stryker Endoscopy, San Jose, CA], MagnumWire [ArthroCare, Sunnyvale, CA], and MaxBraid PE [Arthrotek, Warsaw, IN]) were tied arthroscopically into standardized loops using 6 different knots (Weston, Tennessee slider, Duncan, SMC, Revo, and San Diego knot) 10 times each. The suture loops were pretensioned to 10N, cycled between 10N and 45N for 1,000 cycles, and loaded to failure. The failure load for each suture, each knot, and slippage trend during cyclic loading was recorded. RESULTS: The Revo and SMC knots (group A) were stronger than the Tennessee and San Diego knots (group B), which were stronger than the Weston knot, which was stronger than the Duncan loop (P < .05). This pattern also coincided with the loads at which these knots slipped. Evaluating the sutures showed that Ethibond had lower failure loads than all other sutures and FiberWire showed statistically higher loads (P < .05). Duncan loops (97.5%) and Weston knots (86.3%) slipped more than other knots (P < .001), while the SMC and Revo knots slipped least. Ethibond sutures were least likely to slip. CONCLUSIONS: The Duncan loop and Weston knot were more likely to slip than all other knots, and caution should be exercised when tying them with high-strength sutures. The Revo, Tennessee slider, San Diego, and SMC knots were least likely to slip (P < .001). CLINICAL RELEVANCE: While stronger than braided polyester sutures, newer sutures containing ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene have a greater tendency to slip. Backing up knots with 4 reversed half hitches with switched posts does not guarantee knot security.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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