Association Between Patient Factors and Outcome of Synthetic Cartilage Implant Hemiarthroplasty vs First Metatarsophalangeal Joint Arthrodesis in Advanced Hallux Rigidus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We evaluated data from a clinical trial of first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ1) implant hemiarthroplasty and arthrodesis to determine the association between patient factors and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years with hallux rigidus grade 2, 3, or 4 were treated with synthetic cartilage implant MTPJ1 hemiarthroplasty or arthrodesis. Pain visual analog scale (VAS), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) sports and activities of daily living (ADL) scores, and Short Form-36 Physical Function (SF-36 PF) subscore were obtained preoperatively, and at 2, 6, 12, 24, 52, and 104 weeks postoperatively. Final outcome data, great toe active dorsiflexion motion, secondary procedures, radiographs, and safety parameters were evaluated for 129 implant hemiarthroplasties and 47 arthrodeses. The composite primary endpoint criteria for clinical success included VAS pain reduction ≥30%, maintenance/improvement in function, no radiographic complications, and no secondary surgical intervention at 24 months. Predictor variables included hallux rigidus grade; gender; age; body mass index (BMI); symptom duration; prior MTPJ1 surgery; preoperative hallux valgus angle, range of motion (ROM), and pain. Two-sided Fisher exact test was used ( P < .05). RESULTS: Patient demographics and baseline outcome measures were similar. Success rates between implant MTPJ1 hemiarthroplasty and arthrodesis were similar ( P > .05) when stratified by hallux rigidus grade, gender, age, BMI, symptom duration, prior MTPJ1 surgery status, and preoperative VAS pain, hallux valgus, and ROM. CONCLUSION: Synthetic cartilage implant hemiarthroplasty was appropriate for patients with grade 2, 3, or 4 hallux rigidus. Its results in those with associated mild hallux valgus (≤20 degrees) or substantial preoperative stiffness were equivalent to MTPJ1 fusion, irrespective of gender, age, BMI, hallux rigidus grade, preoperative pain or symptom duration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, randomized clinical trial.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".