Repair Augmentation of Unstable, Complete Vertical Meniscal Tears With Bone Marrow Venting Procedure: A Prospective, Randomized, Double‐Blind, Parallel‐Group, Placebo‐Controlled Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of meniscal repair in 2 groups of patients: meniscal repair with biological augmentation using a bone marrow venting procedure (BMVP) of the intercondylar notch versus meniscal repair only. METHODS: This single-center, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-arm study included 40 patients (21 menisci in control, 23 in BMVP group) with complete vertical meniscus tears. Patients underwent all-inside and outside-in meniscal repair and a concomitant BMVP of the intercondylar notch or meniscal repair alone during an index arthroscopy. The primary endpoint was the rate of meniscus healing in the 2 groups assessed during a second-look arthroscopy (at week 35). The secondary endpoints were changes in the International Knee Documentation Committee score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and visual analog scale in the 2 groups at 30 months. RESULTS: After 36 weeks, the meniscus healing rate was significantly higher in the BMVP-treated group than in the control group (100% vs. 76%, P = .0035). Functional outcomes were significantly better 30 months after treatment than at baseline in both groups. The International Knee Documentation Committee, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and visual analog scale scores were significantly better in the BMVP-treated group than in the control group. No adverse events were reported during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: Our blinded, prospective, randomized, controlled trial on the role of BMVP augmentation in meniscus repair, indicates that BMVP augmentation results in a significant improvement in the rate of meniscus healing (100% vs. 76%, P = .0035). The risk of adverse events related to augmentation with BMVP of the arthroscopic meniscal repair is very low. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled trial.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".