MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tibial Post Wear in Posterior Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty

2001· article· en· W2289696094 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon Puloski, Richard W. McCalden, Steven J. MacDonald, C H Rorabeck, Robert B. Bourne

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTotal knee arthroplastyAbrasiveMedicineMaterials scienceArthroplastyPolyethyleneOrthodonticsSurgeryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: With extensive use of posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty implants, it is increasingly important to assess the mechanical performance of this design alternative. The purpose of this study was to examine the wear patterns at the femoral cam-tibial post interface in a series of posterior stabilized prostheses retrieved at revision arthroplasty. METHODS: Qualitative and quantitative wear analysis was performed over the surface of the stabilizing posts from twenty-three retrieved total knee components that had been implanted for a mean of 35.6 months (range, 2.3 to 107.2 months). The implants were designs from four different manufacturers. Digital images of the anterior, posterior, medial, and lateral surfaces of the tibial post were made for quantitative analysis and determination of a post wear score. Wear was characterized with a grading system that isolates adhesive, abrasive, and fatigue wear, inferring a weighted score from an estimation of generated polyethylene debris. RESULTS: Evidence of wear or damage was observed on all twenty-three of the stabilizing posts, including those revised because of infection. On the average, 39.9% (range, 18.5% to 60%) of the post surface demonstrated some form of deformation, with adhesive wear, or burnishing, being the predominant wear mechanism. Seven posts (30%) exhibited severe damage with gross loss of polyethylene. The wear caused premature failure and early revision of two components: one of these failures was related to isolated post wear and the other, to severe post wear and subsequent fracture. Overall, wear was primarily posterior, but wear over the anterior, medial, and lateral surfaces was also notable. CONCLUSIONS: The cam-post articulation in posterior stabilized implants can be an additional source of polyethylene wear debris. The variability in wear patterns observed among designs may be due to differences in cam-post mechanics, post location, and post geometry. The surgeon should be aware that the cam-post interface is not an innocuous articulation, and manufacturers should be motivated to produce implants that maintain the function of the post while limiting wear and surface damage.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations262
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207