Excessively Increased Joint‐Line Obliquity After Medial Opening‐Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy Is Associated With Inferior Radiologic and Clinical Outcomes: What Is Permissible Joint‐Line Obliquity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the permissible joint-line obliquity (JLO) based on radiologic and clinical outcomes with midterm follow-up after medial open-wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO). METHODS: Patients who had undergone MOWHTO from March 2014 to May 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. They were divided into 4 groups based on JLO as represented by postoperative medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA). Radiologic parameters including MPTA, joint-line orientation angle (JLOA), joint-line convergence angle (JLCA), posterior tibial slope, weightbearing line ratio (WBLR), and coronal translation were analyzed. Clinical outcomes were evaluated with American Knee Society Score (AKSS), Western Ontario and McMaster University Index, and short-form 36 health survey (SF-36). The changes between preoperation and final follow-up in JLOA and MPTA were defined as ΔJLOA and ΔMPTA. RESULTS: A total of 135 knees were finally included (MPTA ≤90.32° as group I; 90.33° to 92.62° as group II; 92.74° to 95.22° as group III; and ≥95.23° as group IV). The last follow-up MPTA, JLOA, and JLCA values were different between the groups (P < .001, P < .001, and P = .015, respectively). WBLR and JLOA positively correlated with MPTA; however, WBLR showed an abrupt increase at MPTA >96.5°, and the JLOA distribution tended to be greater than the regression line at MPTA >96°. Moreover, ΔJLOA was not as large as ΔMPTA. The percentage of patients attaining a minimal clinically important difference was significantly lower in the AKSS-functional score and SF-36 physical component summary in group IV (P = .008 and 0.021, respectively). CONCLUSION: The JLOA did not change as much as the MPTA, but an MPTA >95.2° abruptly increased the JLOA and valgus overcorrection after MOWHTO. Poor clinical outcomes were more evident in excessive MPTA (>95.2°) than in mildly undercorrected or properly corrected MPTA (<95.2°). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective cohort study.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".