MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998589481 · doi:10.1177/0363546519887737

Spinopelvic Characteristics in Acetabular Retroversion: Does Pelvic Tilt Change After Periacetabular Osteotomy?

2019· article· en· W2998589481 on OpenAlexaff
George Grammatopoulos, Saif Salih, Paul E. Beaulé, Johan Witt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Sports Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelvic tiltOrthodonticsMedicineTilt (camera)AcetabulumOsteotomySurgeryPelvisMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Acetabular retroversion may lead to impingement and pain, which can be treated with an anteverting periacetabular osteotomy (aPAO). Pelvic tilt influences acetabular orientation; as pelvic tilt angle reduces, acetabular version reduces. Thus, acetabular retroversion may be a deformity secondary to abnormal pelvic tilt (functional retroversion) or an anatomic deformity of the acetabulum and the innominate bone (pelvic ring). PURPOSE: To (1) measure the spinopelvic morphology in patients with acetabular retroversion and (2) assess whether pelvic tilt changes after successful anteverting PAO (aPAO), thus testing whether preoperative pelvic tilt was compensatory. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A consecutive cohort of 48 hips (42 patients; 30 ± 7 years [mean ± SD]) with acetabular retroversion that underwent successful aPAO was studied. Spinopelvic morphology (pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, anterior pelvic plane, and sacral slope) was measured from computed tomography scans including the sacral end plate in 21 patients, with adequate images. In addition, the change in pelvic tilt with aPAO was measured via the sacrofemoral-pubic angle with supine pelvic radiographs at an interval of 2.5 ± 2 years. RESULTS: = .676). CONCLUSION: Pelvic tilt in acetabular retroversion was within normal parameters, illustrating "normal" sagittal pelvic balance and values similar to those reported in the literature in healthy subjects. In addition, it did not change after aPAO. Thus, acetabular retroversion was not secondary to a maladaptive pelvic tilt (functional retroversion). Further work is required to assess whether retroversion is a reflection of a pelvic morphological abnormality rather than an isolated acetabular abnormality. Treatment of acetabular retroversion should focus on correcting the deformity rather than attempting to change the functional pelvic position.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207