Association Between Bone Marrow Lesions, Chondral Lesions, and Pain in Patients Without Radiographic Evidence of Degenerative Joint Disease Who Underwent Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bone marrow lesions (BMLs) have been found on magnetic resonance imaging in patients with meniscal tears. Purpose: We sought to determine the prevalence and location of BMLs, the association between BMLs and chondral lesions, and the association between BMLs and pain in patients without radiographic evidence of degenerative joint disease who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of the Chondral Lesions And Meniscus Procedures (ChAMP) randomized controlled trial. BMLs were assessed on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging, and chondral lesions were documented at the time of surgery. Pain was assessed preoperatively and at 1 year after APM using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). The chi-square test was used to examine the association between BMLs and chondral lesions, and the F test was used to examine the association between BMLs and pain. Results: Of 241 patients, 58.9% had ≥1 BMLs, and most were located on the medial tibial plateau (MTP; 74.6%) and/or medial femoral condyle (MFC; 28.9%). Most MTP BMLs were submeniscal (56%), and most MFC BMLs extended beyond the meniscus (73%). There were more MFC chondral lesions for patients with any MFC BMLs ( P = .01) and submeniscal MFC BMLs ( P = .02) versus those without BMLs, and there was no association between BMLs and chondral lesions on the MTP. There was also no association between BMLs and preoperative or postoperative pain scores. Conclusion: In patients without radiographic evidence of degenerative joint disease who underwent APM, BMLs were found in 58.9% of knees and were primarily located in the medial compartment. There was a borderline statistically significant association between BMLs and chondral lesions for the MFC; however, BMLs were not associated with pain scores preoperatively or at 1 year after surgery.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".