Arthroscopic Ankle Arthrodesis: A Review of Current Concepts and Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) has traditionally been the gold standard for improving pain and function in ankle osteoarthritis patients. With advances in arthroscopic technology and improved instrumentation, arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (AAA) has become more popular among orthopedic surgeons with equivalent or better outcomes compared with OAA. Recent studies have shown that, with increasing experience, AAA can even be suitable for large deformities, which has been traditional viewed as a relative contraindication. A review of literature and concepts with expert opinion. AAA has been shown in the literature to have equivalent fusion rates, decreased hospital length of stay, and better short-term and long-term function when compared with OAA. Arthroscopy advantages include faster time to union, decreased morbidity, decreased blood loss, and accelerated rehabilitation. Advanced arthroscopic techniques and instrumentation facilitate joint preparation with limited soft tissue injury, creating a favorable environment for fusion. Arthroscopic techniques lead to better short-term and long-term outcomes and decreased complications compared with open arthrodesis. The technique has been shown to be successful and reproducible within the literature, and can be employed to ultimately reduce overall hospital care costs and improve patient outcomes. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level V. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".