Treatment of Advanced Stage Gonarthrosis With Prolotherapy: Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This case report aims to discuss the clinical and radiological outcomes of prolotherapy at a patient whom to total knee prosthesis had been planned but surgery couldn't be performed due to co-morbidities. CASE PRESENTATION: A 72 year old woman presented with severe pain at her knees for over 5 years. Treatment methods include weight loss, decreasing the weight bearing on the joint, stretching exercises, nonsteroid anti-inflammatory and steroid drugs, and physiotherapy. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scale was applied to measure the osteoarthritis level of the patient: Pain level; 25 points, stiffness level; 10 points, Physical function loss; 80 points, and total WOMAC 115 points. At radiological evaluation, the patient was diagnosed as grade IV osteoarthritis due to significant osteophyte presence and complete joint space narrowing. Six sessions of knee prolotherapy protocol was applied to the patient, one session monthly. CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvement was noted at WOMAC scale (Pain level; 5 points, stiffness level; 2 points, Physical function loss; 15 points, and total WOMAC 22 points). Osteoarthritis level of the patient was improved to grade I at radiological evaluation after a year. Our case is the report that presents radiological evidence in addition to clinical findings of improvement of osteoarthritis level. As a result of this case report, further studies aiming to offer a different minimally invasive treatment option to the patients before surgery may be performed. We are in the opinion that prolotherapy may be preferred more commonly as an efficient method once the importance of ligamentous structures at pathogenesis of osteoarthritis is established.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".