MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982545460 · doi:10.1097/cm9.0000000000000492

Effect of medial meniscus extrusion on arthroscopic surgery outcome in the osteoarthritic knee associated with medial meniscus tear

2019· article· en· W2982545460 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Medical Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWOMACMedial meniscusOsteoarthritisSurgeryMeniscusArthroscopyRadiographyBody mass indexIncidence (geometry)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The potential benefit of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritic knee associated with medial meniscus tear is controversial. This study was conducted to determine the effect of pre-operative medial meniscus extrusion (MME) on arthroscopic surgery outcomes in the osteoarthritic knee associated with medial meniscus tear during a minimum 4-year follow-up. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of a total of 131 patients diagnosed with osteoarthritic knee associated with medial symptomatic degenerative meniscus tear who underwent arthroscopic surgery from January 2012 to December 2014 and were observed for more than 4 years. Patients were classified into two groups: MME ≥3 mm (major MME group, n = 54) and MME <3 mm (non-major MME group, n = 77). Clinical assessments, including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and radiographic assessments, including the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade and medial joint space width (JSW), were evaluated pre-operatively and at final follow-up. The longitudinal changes of clinical and radiographic parameters (WOMAC and the medial JSW change, K-L grade progression) were compared between groups unadjusted and adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index. Four-year survival rates (without progression to knee replacement [KR]) were also evaluated using a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard regression model. RESULTS: Major MME was present in 41% of patients. After a minimum 4-year follow-up, the mean WOMAC total and pain scores improved significantly in both groups. However, the medial JSW and K-L grade worsened significantly. Patients with pre-operative major MME worsened more in WOMAC total (adjusted mean difference [MD] 3.800, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.900, 11.400; P = 0.037) and function (adjusted MD 3.100, 95% CI: 0.700, 6.300; P = 0.038) scores than patients with pre-operative non-major MME, and no significant difference was observed in WOMAC pain and stiffness score between groups. The group with major MME had significantly higher joint space narrowing (adjusted MD -0.630, 95% CI: -1.250, -0.100; P = 0.021) and K-L rate progression (adjusted mean relative risk [RR] 1.310, 95% CI: 1.100, 1.600; P = 0.038) than the group with non-major MME. There was a significantly more KR progression in patients with major MME compared with those with non-major MME (adjusted RR 3.100, 95% CI: 1.100, 9.200; P = 0.042 and adjusted hazard ratio 3.500, 95% CI 1.100, 9.500; P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Osteoarthritic knee patients associated with medial meniscus tear with non-major MME are more responsive to arthroscopic surgery in terms of the clinical and radiologic outcomes and survival for at least 4-year follow-up; however, in terms of pain relief, arthroscopic surgery in patients with major MME is also beneficial as well as in patients with non-major MME.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.281 · 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