No difference in clinical outcome and survivorship after total knee arthroplasty with patellar resurfacing and nonresurfacing after minimum 10-year follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes and surgery survivorship for over 10 years following patellar resurfacing or nonresurfacing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in a cohort of Chinese patients.From 1998 to 2003, 355 patients underwent primary TKA in our institute. The survivorship of TKA between the patellar resurfacing and nonresurfacing groups and the clinical outcome of Hospital for Special Surgery knee score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index score, patellar score, patellar related complications, and radiological results were studied at latest follow-up.There was no statistically significant difference for the Hospital for Special Surgery score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities score, and the patellar score between the 2 groups after an average 12.4-year follow-up. Nonresurfacing group had higher anterior knee pain than the resurfacing group (13.2% vs 5.6%). The patients with rheumatoid arthritis had a 2.9-fold higher rate of patellar-related complications than did the patients with osteoarthritis. The 10-year survival rate was not significantly different between the 2 groups both for revision surgery (P = .505) and for patellar-related complication (P = .194).There was no significant difference in the long-term clinical outcome and survivorship between patellar resurfacing and nonresurfacing. Patellar nonresurfacing could be advisable during primary TKA for osteoarthritis patients. Selective patellar resurfacing for RA patients could achieve lower patellar-related complications.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".