Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic results of medial open wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTO) using either TomoFix ® plate (group A) or Aescula ® plate (group B) in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis. Materials and Methods: Sixty-four consecutive patients who underwent HTO for medial compartmental osteoarthritis from 2008 were included. Mean follow-up duration was 37.1 months. Twenty men and 44 women with a mean age of 50 years (range, 41 to 62 years) were divided into group A (locking plate, n=20) and group B (spacer plate, n=44). Clinical results were evaluated using knee society rating system (KSS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Radiological results were obtained by measuring the mechanical axis, posterior tibial slope, and medial joint space width preoperatively, 3 months postoperatively, and at the final follow-up. Results: In overall patients, the mechanical axis was corrected from 7.8°±2.4° of varus preoperatively to 1.9°±2.2° of valgus 3 months after HTO. At the final follow-up, the mechanical axis was to 2.1°±3.1° of valgus which showed no statistical difference in group A. However, loss of correction was observed at the final follow-up, at 0.1°±3.1° of valgus angulation in group B. The increase of the posterior tibial slope was significantly greater in group A than group B. The joint space width in both groups was improved at last follow-up. All clinical results showed improvement after HTO, with significantly improved KSS and WOMAC scores (p＜0.001). Conclusion: The overall clinical results after HTO for medial compartment osteoarthritis were satisfactory. A group of spacer plates needed for prolonged protective weight bearing and locking plate was effective in maintenance of correction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".