MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2957068548 · doi:10.1055/s-0039-1692992

Comparison of the Radiologic, Arthroscopic, and Clinical Outcomes between Repaired versus Unrepaired Medial Meniscus Posterior Horn Root Tear During Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy

2019· article· en· W2957068548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
O-Sung Lee, Seung‐Hoon Lee, Yong Seuk Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Knee Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh tibial osteotomyMedicineMedial meniscusSurgeryMagnetic resonance imagingArthroscopyOsteoarthritisKnee JointOsteotomyNuclear medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The efficacy and outcomes for the concurrent repair of medial meniscus posterior horn root tear (MMPHRT) during open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) are unclear. This study compared the radiologic, arthroscopic, and clinical outcomes between repaired and unrepaired MMPHRT during OWHTO. Fifty-seven patients were prospectively enrolled from 2014 to 2016. The radiologic, arthroscopic, and clinical outcomes were compared between 25 patients who underwent OWHTO with all-inside repair of MMPRT using FasT-Fix (repaired group) and 32 patients who underwent OWHTO without repair of MMPRT (unrepaired group) with a mean 2-year follow up in both groups. The meniscal healing status was classified as complete, partial, or no healing, according to second-look arthroscopic findings. The medial meniscal extrusion (MME) was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging. The width of medial joint space, joint line convergence angle (JLCA), posterior tibial slope (PTS), Kellgren–Lawrence (KL) grade, hip-knee-ankle angle, and weight-bearing line ratio was evaluated on simple standing. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Knee Society score and the Western Ontario and McMaster University score. Healing rates (partial and complete) of the MMPHRT showed a statistical difference between the two groups (repaired group vs. unrepaired group, 19/25 (76%) vs. 13/32 (40.6%), p = 0.008). The postoperative MME showed no statistical differences between groups (repaired versus unrepaired group: 4.5 ± 1.3 mm vs. 4.5 ± 2.1 mm, p = 0.909). The postoperative width of medial joint space, JLCA, PTS, and KL grade all showed no statistical differences between groups after 2 years of OWHTO. Other radiologic parameters and clinical outcomes showed no statistical differences between groups. Repair of the MMPHRT during OWHTO showed a superior healing rate to the unrepaired MMPHRT. However, repair of the MMPHRT was not related to the radiologic and clinical outcomes. Therefore, there is no clear evidence of the need for the MMPHRT repair during OWHTO.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Knee SurgerySame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207