Posterior ankle labral changes at <scp>MRI</scp>: A preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The transverse ligament in the ankle joint has been described as a labrum-like structure in a previous cadaveric study. The purpose of this study is to assess the spectrum of abnormal changes related to this structure on imaging/MRI, and correlate these findings with other ankle joint findings and patient symptoms. METHOD: A retrospective observational review of 172 ankle MRI scans was carried out independently by two fellowship trained musculoskeletal Radiologists. Correlation between abnormal labral changes, other ankle joint findings and patient symptomatology was performed. RESULTS: Abnormal labral changes were seen in 26% of the MRI scans (n = 44/172) and included signal change, contour abnormality with heterogeneous signal change, linear fluid filled clefts, multidirectional fluid filled clefts, and a macerated labrum. There was a statistically significant association between abnormal labral changes and the presence of Stieda process/os trigonum (P = 0.001), talocrural joint osteoarthritis (P = 0.0003), paralabral cysts (P = 0.0001), imaging features of posterior impingement (P = 0.01), and both medial (P = 0.005) and lateral (P = 0.01) ankle ligament injuries. However, there was no statistically significant association between abnormal labral changes and patient symptoms. CONCLUSION: The posterior ankle labrum can develop a spectrum of abnormal MRI appearances in patients with other ankle joint abnormalities. Although this study showed no correlation between patients' symptoms and posterior ankle labral changes, larger studies are needed to examine the biomechanical alterations that may arise from these labral changes.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".