The Relationships between Anatomical Risk Factors, Articular Cartilage Lesions, and Patient Outcomes following Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
weighted and unweighted pooled OR of having patellofemoral instability and apprehension test post-operatively as compared to pre-operatively was < 0.01.The Kujula score improved from a pre-operative score of 60.57 (95% CI: 54.92 e 66.22) to a post-operative score of 84.88 (95% CI: 80.87 e 88.89), while the Lysholm score improved from a pre-operative score of 61.81 (95% CI: 55.25 e 68.37) to a post-operative score of 92.26 (95% CI: 88.59 e 95.94).The difference in the pre-operative and post-operative Kujula scores and Lysholm scores were statistically significant (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001).The overall proportion of patients participating in sports pre-operatively was 77.91% (95% CI: 68.05 e 85.38), which is similar to the overall 75.58% (95% CI: 65.54 e 83.44) of patients participating in sports post-operatively (p ¼ 0.141).The overall Tegner score improved from 4.45 (95% 3.74 e 5.16) pre-operatively to 5.22 (95% CI: 4.62 e 5.82) postoperatively, though the improvement was not statistically significant (p ¼ 0.100).None of the surgical techniques or graft choice analyzed moderated the difference in outcomes post-operatively.Conclusion: Isolated MPFL reconstruction, without any concomitant procedures, can lead to good outcomes.This includes a significant decrease in the rates of patellofemoral instability and apprehension, a significant increase in functional outcomes as measured by Kujala and Lysholm scores, and the ability to return to pre-injury sporting activities.The different sources of graft (gracilis versus semitendinosus), types of implant used for femoral fixation (screw versus suture anchor), types of femoral fixation (bony versus soft tissue; anatomic versus non-anatomic), types of implant used for patellar fixation (suture anchor versus suture), types of patellar fixation (transpatellar tunnels versus soft tissue; anatomic versus nonanatomic), numbers of transpatellar tunnels used as well as types of graft configuration (single limb versus double limb) all did not affect the good post-operative outcomes after MPFL reconstruction.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".