MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283795033 · doi:10.1016/j.jisako.2022.06.002

The anterolateral capsule is infrequently damaged as evaluated arthroscopically in patients undergoing anatomic ACL reconstruction

2022· article· en· W4283795033 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Rauer, Benjamin B. Rothrauff, Kentaro Onishi, Andrew Cordle, Darren de, Volker Musahl, Freddie H. Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of ISAKOS Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthroscopyConcomitantACL injuryAnterior cruciate ligamentRadiologyMagnetic resonance imagingPhysical examinationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Concomitant anterolateral complex (ALC) injury may contribute to persistent rotatory knee instability following anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. There is no consensus on how to best identify concomitant ALC injury preoperatively, nor how well ALC injury identified on imaging modalities correlates with clinical examination of knee instability. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the incidence of concomitant ALC injury in ACL-injured knees, as determined by arthroscopy to preoperative radiography, ultrasound, and MRI. METHODS: A total of 117 patients with a unilateral primary ACL injury who underwent individualized anatomic ACLR between June 2016 and May 2019 were enrolled. Preoperative imaging modalities, including X-ray, ultrasound, and MRI, were evaluated for concomitant ALC injury. Clinical examination under anesthesia, including the anterior drawer, Lachman, and pivot shift tests were performed. Anterolateral capsule injury, as defined by hemorrhage and/or capsular tearing on diagnostic arthroscopy, was also determined. Correlative analyses of ALC injury incidence and severity were performed across imaging modalities and against clinical examination grades. RESULTS: ALC injury incidence across imaging modalities was as follows: X-ray (3%), arthroscopy (19%), MRI (53%), and US (63%). The ALC injury rate on arthroscopy was significantly less than MRI (p < 0.001) or ultrasound (p < 0.001). ALC injury incidence and severity were significantly correlated between MRI and US grading scales (p = 0.02), but no correlations among other imaging modalities were found. Similarly, no imaging modality meaningfully correlated with physical examination maneuvers. CONCLUSION: The incidence of ALC injury varies across imaging modalities, with lower injury rates found on arthroscopy (19%) compared to MRI (53%) and US (63%). Increasing ALC injury severity grades on imaging does not predict increasing anterolateral knee laxity on clinical examination. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V, retrospective case series.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ISAKOS Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports MedicineSame topicKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesFrench-language works237,207