Effect of Radial Neck Length on Joint Loading
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Load transfer across the radiocapitellar joint of the elbow is poorly understood both in the setting of the native radial head and following radial head arthroplasty. The purpose of this in vitro study was to determine the effects of radial neck length, arm position, and lateral collateral ligament (LCL) repair on radial load.Methods: A uniaxial load cell was implanted into the radial neck of 8 cadaveric specimens that were mounted on an in vitro motion-control simulator and tested (in dependent, varus, and valgus arm orientations) with the native radial neck length and then −4 to +4 mm lengths. Testing was performed with the LCL intact and after sectioning and repair.Results: There was no significant difference between the 2 LCL states (P = .82), and LCL state was not protective of proximal radius overlengthening. Radial loads increased with increasing radial length (P < .001).Discussion and Conclusion: Overlengthening the radial neck resulted in higher compression forces, and underlengthening produced tensile forces, demonstrating that restoration of correct radial length during radial head arthroplasty is important to restore physiologic loading. In the varus position, tensile loading occurred, which may explain clinical problems with ingrowth of uncemented radial head implant stems and dissociation of bipolar implants.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".