MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124315774 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.i.01284

Concentrated Bone Marrow Aspirate Improves Full-Thickness Cartilage Repair Compared with Microfracture in the Equine Model

2010· article· en· W2124315774 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa A. Fortier, Hollis G. Potter, Ellen J. Rickey, Lauren V. Schnabel, Li Foong Foo, Leroy R Chong, Tracy Stokol, Jon Cheetham, Alan J. Nixon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBone marrowMedicineMagnetic resonance imagingCartilageArticular cartilage repairArthroscopyFemurArticular cartilageSurgeryNuclear medicineOsteoarthritisPathologyRadiologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of treatment with bone marrow aspirate concentrate, a simple, one-step, autogenous, and arthroscopically applicable method, with the outcomes of microfracture with regard to the repair of full-thickness cartilage defects in an equine model. METHODS: Extensive (15-mm-diameter) full-thickness cartilage defects were created on the lateral trochlear ridge of the femur in twelve horses. Bone marrow was aspirated from the sternum and centrifuged to generate the bone marrow concentrate. The defects were treated with bone marrow concentrate and microfracture or with microfracture alone. Second-look arthroscopy was performed at three months, and the horses were killed at eight months. Repair was assessed with use of macroscopic and histological scoring systems as well as with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: No adverse reactions due to the microfracture or the bone marrow concentrate were observed. At eight months, macroscopic scores (mean and standard error of the mean, 9.4 + or - 1.2 compared with 4.4 + or - 1.2; p = 0.009) and histological scores (11.1 + or - 1.6 compared with 6.4 + or - 1.2; p = 0.02) indicated improvement in the repair tissue in the bone marrow concentrate group compared with that in the microfracture group. All scoring systems and magnetic resonance imaging data indicated that delivery of the bone marrow concentrate resulted in increased fill of the defects and improved integration of repair tissue into surrounding normal cartilage. In addition, there was greater type-II collagen content and improved orientation of the collagen as well as significantly more glycosaminoglycan in the bone marrow concentrate-treated defects than in the microfracture-treated defects. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of bone marrow concentrate can result in healing of acute full-thickness cartilage defects that is superior to that after microfracture alone in an equine model. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Delivery of bone marrow concentrate to cartilage defects has the clinical potential to improve cartilage healing, providing a simple, cost-effective, arthroscopically applicable, and clinically effective approach for cartilage repair.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations423
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207