Factors Affecting the Clinical Outcomes of Surgically Treated Ankle Fractures Associated with the Posterior Malleolar Fragment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study was performed to determine the factors that influence the clinical outcomes of surgically treated ankle fractures associated with the posterior malleolus (PM). METHODS: We evaluated 42 fractures of 42 patients. Posterior malleolus fracture size was calculated using computed tomography. Posterior malleolar fractures with a size less than 10% were left nonfixated. The decision for larger fragments was performed using fluoroscopy following the fixation of other components. If the joint was found to be congruent, the PM was left nonfixated. Otherwise, the PM was reduced and fixated. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on Weber, Freiburg, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores. Ankle osteoarthritis was determined according to the Canadian Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society classification. The effect of PM fixation, age, PM fragment size, waiting period before surgery, presence of ankle dislocation, and number of injured malleoli on clinical outcomes were assessed. Statistical significance was set at a value of P < .05. RESULTS: The mean patients age was 48.5 ± 14.9 years (range, 20-84 years) and the mean follow-up was 23.7 ± 8.6 months (range, 12-56 months). Fixation of the PM was performed solely in 12 patients. Postoperative displacement of the PM and articular step were less than 2 mm in all fractures. Statistically significant worse outcomes were demonstrated based on functional scores in the patients with a PM size greater than or equal to 25% (P = .042, P = .038, and P = .048, respectively) and in patients aged 60 years or older (P = .005, P = .007, and P = .018, respectively). However, there was no significant difference between functional scores and the other factors. Ankle osteoarthritis was observed at a higher rate in patients with PM size greater than or equal to 25% and in patients aged 60 years or older. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes of the patients are mainly influenced by the patient's age and PM fragment size. However, if the tibiotalar joint is congruent, comparable results can be obtained in PM fixated or nonfixated patients.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".