MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187583223 · doi:10.1016/j.recot.2021.05.007

Fijación artroscópica sin metal del bloque óseo en la inestabilidad anterior del hombro. Resultados funcionales y radiológicos a corto plazo

2021· article· es· W3187583223 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abdul-ilah Hachem, M. Rodríguez, R. Rondanelli, Xavier Ríus, Andrés Molina-Creixell, Pablo Cañete San Pastor, Francisco Javier Cabo

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología · 2021
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiographyRadiological weaponOsteolysisSurgeryFixation (population genetics)Soft tissueNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existen múltiples técnicas para la reconstrucción del defecto óseo glenoideo con bloque óseo en la inestabilidad glenohumeral anterior que reducen el riesgo de recidiva tras cirugía de partes blandas, la mayoría utilizando fijación metálica. El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la seguridad quirúrgica y los resultados funcionales y radiológicos a corto plazo de los pacientes sometidos a una técnica artroscópica con bloque óseo y fijación sin metal. Estudio retrospectivo de pacientes con inestabilidad y defecto óseo glenoideo > 15% con 12 meses de seguimiento mínimo. Se sometieron a estudio radiográfico y tomografía axial computarizada. Se cumplimentaron escalas funcionales de manera pre y postoperatoria: el Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index y la escala de Rowe. Se incluyeron un total de 21 pacientes con una edad media de 30,6 (DE 7,1). Todos mostraron consolidación radiográfica a los 3 meses. El 90,4% de los injertos presentó osteólisis en las áreas más periféricas y el 95,2% presentó consolidación en las áreas de contacto con la glenoides. La media del área de superficie de la glenoides pasó del 79,3% preoperatoria al 98,4% a los 12 meses. Los resultados funcionales medios resultaron estadísticamente significativos (p < 0,001) tanto para el Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (de 35,6 a 86,9) como para la escala de Rowe (de 25,2 a 96,4). No se presentaron complicaciones graves. La técnica de bloque óseo y fijación sin metal es un método de fijación seguro, sin componentes metálicos. Consigue una consolidación completa del injerto con buenos resultados funcionales y radiográficos a los 12 meses. Anterior glenohumeral bone loss reconstruction reduces failure rates after soft tissue surgery in patients with large glenoid bone defects. Multiple bone block techniques have been described, most with metal hardware fixation. The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety, as well as the short-term functional and radiological results of an arthroscopic bone block metal-free fixation or bone block cerclage. Retrospective study of patients with glenohumeral instability and > 15% glenoid bone loss operated during 2019 with follow-up of at least 12 months. Radiography and computerized tomography studies were performed. Functional outcomes were evaluated before and after surgery with the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index and Rowe score. A total of 21 patients with a median age of 30.6 (SD 7.1) were included. All showed radiographic consolidation at 3 months follow-up. A percentage of 90.4 of bone grafts presented osteolysis at peripherical areas and 95.2% revealed consolidation in the areas with contact to the glenoid. The median glenoid estimated surface went from 79.3% before surgery to 98.4% at 12 months. Functional scores were statically significant (P < .001) for Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (35.6-86.9) and Rowe score (25.2 to 96.4). No serious complications were reported. The bone block cerclage is a safe, metal-free technique that achieves total consolidation of the bone graft and favorable functional and radiological outcomes at 12 months follow-up.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Española de Cirugía Ortopédica y TraumatologíaSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207