Extensor mechanism reconstruction “Tubeplasty” in total knee arthroplasty with previous patellectomy: Surgical technique and clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: to evaluate our consecutive series of tubeplasty and extensor mechanism reconstruction during knee arthroplasty in patients with previous patellectomy. METHODS: we describe our surgical technique and present a retrospective consecutive series of 4 patients with a minimum 6 months follow-up. Knee society score (KSS), clinical and radiographic outcomes were collected at final follow up. RESULTS: we included 4 patients (2 males/2 females) with average age 65.5 years (range 58-76). There were 2 primary and 2 revision knee arthroplasties. The follow up ranged from 0.5 to 13 years. All 4 patients regained function and satisfactory clinical outcomes with KSS score 84.7 (range 79-90). CONCLUSION: satisfactory clinical outcomes can be achieved with extensor mechanism reconstruction and tubeplasty in patients with previous patellectomy undergoing primary and revision knee arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".