Treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus with microfracture technique and postoperative hyaluronan injection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to report the outcomes of the treatment of talar osteochondral lesions with arthroscopic microfracture technique and postoperative intra-articular hyaluronan injection. METHOD: Fifty-seven patients (29 men, 28 women) with osteochondral lesions of the talus were included in this prospective randomized clinical study between the years 2003 and 2009. The patients were treated with arthroscopic debridement and microfracture technique. Randomly selected 41 patients were injected intra-articular hyaluronan (injection group). The remaining 16 patients did not receive postoperative injection (non-injection group). Assessment of the pain and functional outcomes was performed using the Freiburg and AOFAS ankle/hindfoot scoring systems. RESULTS: In the injection group, the mean postoperative Freiburg functional and pain scores were significantly higher compared to preoperative functional and pain scores (P < 0.001). Similarly, for the patients in non-injection group, the mean postoperative Freiburg functional and pain scores were significantly higher compared to preoperative functional and pain scores (P < 0.001). The AOFAS functional and pain scores of the patients in the injection group were significantly higher (P < 0.001) postoperatively compared to preoperative scores. Scoring the patients in the non-injection group according to AOFAS system also revealed significantly higher (P < 0.001) postoperative functional and pain scores over preoperative scores. The increase in the postoperative scores was found to be significantly higher in the injection group compared to non-injection group in both Freiburg and AOFAS systems (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus using microfracture technique significantly improved functional and pain scores postoperatively. Additional treatment with intra-articular hyaluronan injection as an adjunct to microfracture technique may offer better clinical outcomes over microfracture technique alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Randomized, controlled trial, Level I.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".