Does Patient-Specific Instrumentation Have a Higher Rate of Early Osteolysis Than Standard Referencing Techniques in Total Ankle Arthroplasty? A Radiographic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) has been developed for total ankle arthroplasty (TAA), with proven benefits. One concern regarding PSI is the need for more soft tissue dissection in order to accurately position the PSI guides, which has the theoretical disadvantage of increased osteolysis. The purpose of our study is to compare the incidence and magnitude of osteolysis for the INFINITY Total Ankle System between PSI and standard referencing (SR) techniques. Methods: Sixty-seven patients who underwent primary TAA using Prophecy (PSI) or SR technique between 2013 and 2015 were reviewed in a retrospective observational study. Osteolysis was assessed on radiographs at 2 years. The incidence was calculated by binomial distribution. The number of zones compromised and the magnitude of osteolysis was calculated using the median as a summary statistic and interquartile range as dispersion statistic. Fisher exact test was used to compare both groups, then a regression model was estimated to calculate the odds ratio for osteolysis. Results: Of the 67 TAAs, 51 were in the PSI group and 16 in the SR group. In the PSI group the incidence, number of compromised zones (CZ), and magnitude was 41% (25%-59%), 1 [1-2], and 2 [2-3], respectively. In the SR group these were 36% (13%-65%), 3 [2-3], and 3 [2-4], respectively. No significant differences were found ( P = .46, P = .12, P = .33). A slightly higher risk of osteolysis was found in the PSI group (odds ratio = 1.33 [0.36-4.83]) ( P = .46). The majority of lesions were in 1 zone with size of 2 to 5 mm (63% for all cohort, 64% PSI, 60% SR). Two cases underwent revision for aseptic loosening, 1 in the SR group and 1 in the PSI group. Conclusion: According to our data, there is no significant difference between PSI and SR in terms of risk, incidence, size and magnitude of osteolysis in the INFINITY Total Ankle System at 2 years. Levels of Evidence: Therapeutic, Level III, Retrospective cohort study
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".