MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2618831857 · doi:10.1177/2325967117s00209

The Complimentary Contributions of the Anterolateral Ligament and the Lateral Meniscus to the Control of Rotational Knee Laxity

2017· article· en· W2618831857 on OpenAlexaff
Tim Lording, Gillian Corbo, Tim Burkhart, Alan Getgood

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaveric spasmDivision (mathematics)MeniscusMedicineAnatomyLigamentFemurAnterolateral ligamentCadaverAnterior cruciate ligamentTibiaKnee flexionOrthodonticsSurgeryAnterior cruciate ligament reconstructionMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Anatomical studies consistently describe an anatomical connection between the anterolateral ligament (ALL) and the lateral meniscus. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of the ALL and lateral meniscal posterior root (LMPR) in internal rotational (IR) control in the ACL deficient knee. Methods: Sixteen cadaveric knees were potted into a hip simulator proximally and a six degree of freedom load cell distally. Positional data for femur and tibia were collected using a navigation system. Testing was performed in 15° increments from extension to 90° of flexion under a 5 Nm internal rotational torque. Specimens were tested in the intact state and after division of the ACL (ACL-), before randomization to division of the ALL (ALL-/M+) or LMPR (ALL+/M-), and finally after division of the remaining structure (ALL-/LMPR-). A one-way ANOVA was performed for each sectioning condition at each knee flexion angle (α = 0.05). Results: In extension, there was no significant increase in IR after division of the ACL. After division of the LMPR, there was a significant increase in IR compared to the intact state of 2.93° (p<0.05). Division of the ALL caused only a small increase in IR compared to the intact state (0.87°, NS). Division of the ALL after the LMPR caused no additional increase in IR. At 30° flexion, division of the ALL caused a greater magnitude increase in IR when compared to the intact state than division of the LMPR (4.04° vs 1.32°), although neither reached statistical significance. At 45° flexion, division of the ALL increased IR compared to the intact state by 10.92° (p<0.05), whilst IR caused by division of the PRLM did not reach significance. This pattern of ALL dominance was maintained at 60° and 75° of knee flexion, where the increase in IR was significant compared to both the intact and ACL deficient states. Discussion: The ALL and LMPR demonstrate complimentary roles in the control of internal rotation, with the meniscal root more important near extension and the ALL beyond 30° of flexion. These results do not support anatomical ALL reconstruction for control of the pivot shift. LMPR repair may improve stability and have benefits for chondroprotection.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207