Arthroscopic Repair of Talar Osteochondral Defects With Umbilical Cord Allograft: A Prospective, Single-Center, Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cryopreserved umbilical cord (UC) allografts have been shown to promote postoperative wound healing by suppressing inflammation and reducing scar formation. The purpose of this study was to determine whether adjunctive use of UC may improve clinical and functional outcomes following arthroscopic repair of talar osteochondral defects (OCDs). A total of 10 patients with talar OCDs that failed nonoperative treatment were enrolled in this single-center, prospective, pilot study. Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed using the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scale at 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks postoperatively. Results showed a consistent improvement in all outcome measures. VAS pain scores significantly improved from 4.2 ± 2.9 to 1.3 ± 2.2 at 52 weeks (P = .015). AOS difficulty and pain scores nonsignificantly improved from 27.0 ± 24.6 and 33.1 ± 28.3 at baseline to 15.3 ± 20.5 and 14.8 ± 18.7 at 52 weeks, respectively. The clinical outcome improvement was accompanied by significant reduction in OCD defect size and associated bone marrow lesion. This pilot study suggests that adjunctive use of UC during arthroscopic repair of talar OCD may lead to clinical and functional improvement. Levels of Evidence: Level II: Prospective Cohort Study
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".