Effect of Changes in the Posterior Tibial Slope on Femorotibial Articular Contact Kinematics after Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty: Do the Changes Affect Outcomes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) outcomes are affected by many factors.This study aimed to evaluate whether changes in the posterior tibial slope (PTS) affects patients’ outcomes after cruciate-retaining TKA by affecting femorotibial articular contact kinematics. Methods Altogether, 20 knees in 10 patients who underwent posterior cruciate ligament-retaining TKA using the same size prosthesis for medial osteoarthritis were assessed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. PTS changes seen on lateral radiographs before and after TKA were calculated. Knees were placed in groups according to the PTS change at 1 year postoperatively (preoperative value − postoperative value). Group 1 had a >3° change and group 2 a ≤3° change. Knee kinematics under the weight-bearing mid-flexion condition were compared between the two groups via two-dimensional/three-dimensional registration. Pain was measured using the visual analog scale, and knee function was based on the Western Ontario and McMaster universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index and Knee Society Score (KSS) questionnaire results. Results Group 2 experienced paradoxical anterior motion of the mediofemoral condyle postoperatively, whereas group 1 did not. Comparison of TKA results between the two groups showed a significant between-group difference in pain and knee function of the KSS and in the WOMAC osteoarthritis index score (P ≤ 0.05). Postoperative results were better in group 1 than in group 2. Conclusions Achieving a greater change in the posterior tibial slope apparently improves outcomes in patients undergoing posterior cruciate ligament-retaining TKA because it reduces the paradoxical medial femoral condylar movement.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".