MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2228871375 · doi:10.1016/j.eats.2015.07.008

Treatment of Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus With Bone Marrow Stimulation and Chitosan–Glycerol Phosphate/Blood Implants (BST‐CarGel)

2015· article· en· W2228871375 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jesús Vilá‐Rico, Antonio Dalmau, Francisco Javier Chaqués, Jordi Asunción

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy Techniques · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLesionBone marrowCartilageChitosanSurgerySubchondral boneStimulationHyaline cartilageHyalinePathologyArticular cartilageAnatomyOsteoarthritisInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bone marrow stimulation (BMS) techniques represent the first-line treatment for unstable osteochondral lesions of the talus or after conservative treatment failure. These techniques are intended to penetrate the subchondral bone to elicit bleeding and allow precursor cells and cytokines from bone marrow to populate the lesion. However, the fibrocartilaginous repair tissue arising after marrow stimulation confers inferior mechanical and biological properties compared with the original hyaline cartilage. The limitations of BMS can be overcome by the use of the soluble chitosan-based polymer BST-CarGel (Piramal Life Sciences, Laval, Quebec, Canada). When mixed with freshly drawn autologous whole blood and applied to a lesion surgically prepared by BMS, BST-CarGel acts as a natural bioscaffold that increases the quantity and improves the residency of the blood clot formed in the cartilage lesion, enhancing the local healing response. The use of BST-CarGel has been previously described in the knee and hip joints with successful results. We describe the arthroscopic technique for BST-CarGel application in combination with BMS techniques for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus.

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: Case report · 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)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations22
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy TechniquesSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207