The efficacy of intraarticular viscosupplementation after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of viscosupplementation after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. METHOD: A randomized controlled trial of 47 patients who underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy was conducted between March 2020 and March 2021. Patients were randomized into two groups: a viscosupplementation group (n = 23) and a control group (n = 24). A single-dose intraarticular hyaluronic acid injection was used as viscosupplementation. The 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain assessment was measured at baseline and at 1 day, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months post-surgery. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Tegner, Lysholm, and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and range of motion (ROM) of the knee were measured at baseline, 2 weeks, 6 weeks, and 3 months. RESULTS: The 100 mm VAS score for pain was significantly lower in the viscosupplementation group at 2 weeks post-surgery (27.5 mm vs. 40.7 mm, P = 0.047). ROM was significantly greater in the viscosupplementation group than in the control group at 2 weeks (131.5° vs. 121.0°, P = 0.044) post-surgery. No significant differences were observed in the IKDC or in the Tegner, Lysholm, and WOMAC scores between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Viscosupplementation after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy significantly reduced pain at 2 weeks post-surgery and improved ROM of the knee at 2 weeks post-surgery. There might be some benefits in terms of pain and functional recovery of viscosupplementation after arthroscopic surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This randomized controlled trial was registered at cris.nih.go.kr # KCT0004921 .
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".