INDICATIONS FOR PATELLAR RESURFACING IN TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The management of the patella in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) traditionally has been one of three options: always resurface, never resurface, or selectively resurface the patella. Historically, implant design and surgical technique did not completely address the patellofemoral articulation. Increased understanding of patellofemoral anatomy, biomechanics, implant design, and surgical technique have led to an improvement in the previously reported high rate of patellofemoral complications associated with TKA. Traditional indications for patellar resurfacing, including age, weight, gender, patellar anatomy, quality of articular cartilage, radiographic findings, and the presence of rheumatoid arthritis deformity and preoperative anterior knee pain continue to be debated. Anterior knee pain before and after TKA must not always be presumed to be secondary to a patellofemoral resurfacing/nonresurfacing etiology, and other factors may play a role in the dynamic development of anterior knee pain after TKA. The decision to resurface the patella in TKA remains controversial, and the results of longer-term randomized controlled trials will improve understanding of this complex issue in the future.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".