MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3194263563 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.rvw.20.00231

Isolated Arthroscopic-Assisted Subtalar Fusion

2021· review· en· W3194263563 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJBJS Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNonunionSubtalar jointSurgeryPatient satisfactionArthroscopyDysesthesiaArthrodesisAnkle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The subtalar joint has a complex anatomic function that includes inversion and eversion of the hindfoot, assisting in walking on uneven surfaces. Arthritis is the most common pathological condition affecting this joint and can require fusion. The surgery can be performed open or with arthroscopic assistance. This systematic review assesses articles written on the safety and efficacy of isolated arthroscopic subtalar fusion. METHODS: Using MEDLINE and Embase, we systematically reviewed articles published before May 21, 2020. RESULTS: Of 395 articles, 17 on a total of 395 patients (409 operations) were included in the review. The average duration of follow-up was 40.0 months (range, 3 to 105 months). Radiographic evidence of union was reported for 95.8% of cases at an average of 11.9 weeks (range, 6 to 56 weeks) postoperatively. Delayed union was reported in 1.0% of patients and nonunion, in 4.3% of patients. In the articles reporting patient satisfaction, including pain relief, 95.4% of patients had positive outcomes. Postoperative complications were reported in 64 patients (16.2%), including 37 (9.4%) with symptomatic implants, 11 (2.8%) with dysesthesia or neuropathic pain, and 3 (0.8%) with postoperative infection. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic subtalar fusion is a safe and effective alternative to open subtalar arthrodesis, with high patient satisfaction rates, high union rates at similar follow-up intervals, and low complication rates. The aim of future research should be to determine the ideal cases for this approach as well as the most efficient arthroscopic surgical technique and postoperative rehabilitation to optimize function and union as seen on radiographs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.267 · 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