MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of high tibial osteotomy and fibula osteotomy in treatment of knee osteoarthritis

2018· article· en· W3029578487 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qiu Huayao, Zong-quan Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueChin J Joint Surg(Electronic Edition) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHigh tibial osteotomyWOMACOsteoarthritisSurgeryOrthopedic surgeryOsteotomyBlood lossArthroplastyRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of high tibial osteotomy (HTO) and fibular osteotomy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Methods A retrospective analysis was made on the patients with KOA who underwent HTO or fibular osteotomy from January 2015 to December 2016 in the 9th Department of Orthopedics, Foshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine. There were 37 cases in HTO group, 11 males and 26 females, with an average age of (59±3) 26 cases in fibular osteotomy group, nine males and 17 females, with an average age of (59±3). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, total hospitalization cost, postoperative complications and knee arthroplasty were analyzed between the two groups. The Lysholm score and the University of Western Ontario and Manchester arthritis index (WOMAC) were used to assess the knee function before surgery, six months after surgery and 12 months after surgery. Data were analyzed by SPSS13.0 statistical software. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, total cost of hospitalization, Lysholm score and WOMAC score were examined by independent sample t-test, and chi-square test was used to compare the incidence of postoperative knee arthroplasty and postoperative complications during follow-up period. Results The median follow-up time of group HTO was 15.7 months, and the fibula osteotomy group had a median follow-up of 14.9 months. The operation time (t=21.094, P<0.05), intraoperative blood loss (t= 9.91, P<0.05), total hospitalization cost (t=65.471, P<0.05) in HTO group were significantly lower than those in fibular osteotomy group. There was one complication case in HTO group (2.7%) and two complication cases in fibular osteotomy group (7.7%) and no significant difference was found between the two groups by Fisher′s exact probability analysis (P=0.785). There was no significant difference in Lysholm score and WOMAC score between the two groups before operation. The Lysholm score in HTO group was significantly better than that in fibular osteotomy group (t=2.426, P<0.05). WOMAC score in HTO group was significantly lower than that in fibular osteotomy group (t=3.997, P<0.01). The Lysholm score (t=2.979, P<0.01), WOMAC score (t=-2.472, P<0.05) in HTO group were significantly better than those in fibular osteotomy group 12 months after operation. Conclusion High tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis of the knee is more time-consuming, more bleeding and more hospital costs than fibular osteotomy; 12 months follow-up shows that high tibial osteotomy can achieve better knee function than fibular osteotomy. Key words: Osteotomy; Tibia; Fibula; Osteoarthritis, knee

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChin J Joint Surg(Electronic Edition)Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207