The Design of the Patellar Component Does Not Affect the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Primary Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Randomized Prospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This randomized comparative study was conducted to investigate the outcomes of patellar resurfacing with a medialized dome or an anatomical type in patients receiving primary unilateral posterior-stabilized TKA. Between March 2019 and January 2021, 98 knees were randomly assigned to receive patellar resurfacing by a medialized dome type (group D, 49 knees) or an anatomic type (group A, 49 knees). The primary outcome was the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. The secondary outcomes were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Feller’s patella score, the Kujala anterior knee pain score, knee joint range of motion (ROM), and postoperative complications, including periprosthetic patellar fracture, patellar tilt angle, and lateral patellar shift. Patient-reported outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. The ROM of the knee joint was significantly better in group A at six months after surgery (p = 0.021). No complications such as patellar fractures were observed. The anatomic type of patellar component showed a significant improvement of the patellar tilt angle after surgery compared with the medialized dome type of component. However, there were no significant differences in patient-reported clinical outcomes between the two groups during the follow-up period of 12 months.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".