Mid‐term outcomes and complications of total knee arthroplasty in haemophilic arthropathy: A review of consecutive 131 knees between 2006 and 2015 in a single institute
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in haemophilic arthropathy can reduce severe joint pain and improve functional disability, it is technically demanding. AIM: To evaluate mid-term outcomes and complications of TKA in haemophilic arthropathy. METHODS: This study retrospectively reviewed 131 consecutive primary TKAs in a single institute. The mean age was 41.0 years old, and the mean follow-up period was 6.8 years. Clinical and radiographic results were evaluated. Complications were categorized according to the classification system of the Knee Society for TKA complications. RESULTS: The average Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score improved from 66.0 to 24.2. The average flexion contracture significantly decreased from 17.3° to 4.7°, but the average pre- and postoperative maximum flexion did not differ (80.9° vs 85.6°, respectively). The average mechanical axis was varus 5.2° preoperatively and valgus 0.3° postoperatively. The coronal positions of the femoral and tibial components and the sagittal positions of these components were within ±3° in 83.2%, 89.3%, 63.4% and 73.3% of cases, respectively. Complications occurred in 17 knees (13.0%): hemarthrosis (n = 7), medial collateral ligament injury (n = 1), stiffness (n = 2), deep periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 3) and periprosthetic fracture (n = 4). CONCLUSIONS: The mid-term results of TKA in haemophilic arthropathy were satisfactory in pain relief, improved function and decreased flexion contracture. Bleeding and PJI continue to be major concerns for TKA in haemophilic arthropathy, and risk of periprosthetic fracture must be taken into account for patient education and appropriate prevention.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".