Ulnar ostectomy decreases the stability of canine cadaver carpi as assessed with stress radiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distal ulnar ostectomy may be performed palliatively in patients with distal ulnar osteosarcoma. Concurrent arthrodesis of the carpus has been proposed to counteract joint instability following transection of carpal ligaments associated with removal of the distal ulna. The objective of this prospective one group pretest, posttest study was to assess stability of the carpus following distal ulnar ostectomy using pre- and postoperative stress radiographic views in a group of canine cadaver limbs. Seven thoracic limbs from six canine cadavers weighing more than 20 kg were obtained. Lateral and dorsopalmar, extended lateral, medial stress, and lateral stress radiographs were made before and after distal ulnar ostectomy. Presurgical canine cadaver carpal angle measurements were as follows (mean ± standard deviation): extension 205.9° ± 5.4; medial stress 25.1° ± 5.7; and lateral stress 13.3° ± 5.2°. Cadaver limb joint angles exceeded those previously reported in live dogs. A significant increase in carpal angle was noted following ulnar ostectomy. The mean increases in carpal angle were as follows: (mean ± standard deviation (95% confidence interval)): extension 6.2° ± 4.9 (2.6-9.8) (P = 0.007); medial stress 3.2° ± 3.0 (1.0-5.5) (P = 0.015); lateral stress 6.2° ± 5.2 (2.4-10.1) (P = 0.010). Findings from this cadaver study support the use of supplementary stabilization for clinical patients undergoing distal ulnar ostectomy. Future studies are needed in clinical patients to evaluate changes in limb positioning and gait associated with distal ulnar ostectomy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".