Arthroscopic Lysis of Adhesions for Stiff Total Knee Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopic lysis of adhesions after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in improving range of motion (ROM) and providing an improvement in knee function. The authors retrospectively examined 19 patients who underwent arthroscopic lysis of adhesions following TKA due to poor ROM. The criterion for lysis was the inability to flex to 90° at 3 months. All patients were followed for at least 2 years after lysis. Patient demographics, postoperative and follow-up ROM,number of prior surgeries, Knee Society Scores, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) functional scores were collected. Average ROM increased from 75.37° preoperatively to 98.95° postoperatively. The authors found an association between preoperative knee score and change in ROM between pre-arthroscopic lysis and ROM at final follow-up (P=.0188). When the authors examined the relationship between patient body mass index (BMI) and change in ROM,they found that patients with a BMI higher than 30 kg/m2 had a change of 26.44° compared with patients with a BMI lower than 30 kg/m2, who had a change of only 8.75°. A strong association was found between patient height and change in ROM and final ROM achieved (P=.0062 and .0032, respectively). The authors report a successful outcome among study patients. Furthermore, they found an association between patient height, BMI, and preoperative knee score and the improvement achieved after arthroscopic lysis of adhesions following TKA. The current study's results are comparable with those of published results. The authors recommend arthroscopic lysis of adhesions as a treatment option for stiff knees after TKA that fails after at least 3 months of nonoperative treatment.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".