Effect of a Flexor Digitorum Superficialis Hemitenodesis on Reducing Volar Plate Strains for Swan Neck Deformities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Flexor digitorum superficialis (FDS) hemitenodesis is a common procedure to treat swan neck deformity (SND). We hypothesize that this surgical technique is a biomechanically effective way to reduce strain in the volar plate at the proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ). Methods Fifteen digits from 5 cadaveric specimens were tested using a novel in vitro active finger motion simulator under 4 finger conditions: intact, SND, FDS hemitenodesis, and FDS hemitenodesis with distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint fusion. Tensile loads in FDS and flexor digitorum profundus (FDP) and joint ranges of motion were measured by electromagnetic tracking. In addition, strain gauges were inserted under the volar plate to measure strain during PIPJ hyperextension. Results were analyzed using 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance tests. Results The SND condition increased volar plate strain by 176% ± 25% ( P < .001) compared with the intact condition. The FDS hemitenodesis repair relieved more than 50% of the SND strain, restoring it to within no statistical difference from intact. The DIP fusion further reduced strain with no further statistical significance. At full flexion, FDS and FDP tendon loads diverged as a function of the test condition ( P < .001). With the FDS hemitenodesis, the FDP load increased by 2.1 ± 1.5 N from the SND condition ( P < .001), whereas the FDS load decreased by 1.3 ± 1.3 N ( P = .012). Conclusion The FDS hemitenodesis repair restored strains to within 3.0 milli-strain of the intact condition with no significant difference. Application of DIP fusion did not further protect the PIPJ from increased hyperextension and further exacerbated the imbalance of flexor tendon loads.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".