Biplane Medial Opening-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy Increases Posterior Tibial Slope more than Uniplane Osteotomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Few clinical studies have compared uniplane high tibial osteotomy (HTO) with biplane HTO. The study aim was to compare the radiological and clinical results of uniplane HTO and biplane HTO, especially in terms of the increase in the posterior tibial slope (PTS). Medial opening-wedge HTO patients' medical records and radiological results from a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Pre- and postoperative serial radiographs, including the Rosenberg, lateral view, and standing anteroposterior view of the whole lower extremity, magnetic resonance imaging at postoperative day 2, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score at postoperative 2 years were reviewed to evaluate radiological and clinical results, including the change in PTS. A total of 61 knees, including 34 for uniplane and 27 for biplane HTOs, were enrolled. There were no significant differences in the pre- and postoperative mechanical angles or incidences of the lateral hinge fractures, and all patients showed complete union at postoperative 2 years. The PTS was increased more in the biplane group than in the uniplane group (3.1 ± 2.6 in biplane vs. 0.8 ± 1.7 in uniplane, p < 0.05). The WOMAC scores were 72 ± 9.3 in the uniplane and 75 ± 5.8 in the biplane group (not significant). The increase in PTS was lower in uniplane medial opening HTO than in biplane HTO.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".