MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310222709 · doi:10.1111/os.13595

Mid‐Term Outcomes of Navigation‐Assisted Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Using Adjusted Mechanical Alignment

2022· article· en· W4310222709 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Surgery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPriority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education InstitutionsNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineCoronal planeWOMACOsteoarthritisRadiographyPerioperativeSurgeryRetrospective cohort studyOrthopedic surgeryOrthodonticsAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The adjusted mechanical alignment (aMA) technique is an extension of conventional mechanical alignment (MA), which has rarely been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate mid-term outcomes of navigation-assisted total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using aMA. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study enrolled 63 consecutive patients (77 knees) who underwent navigation-assisted TKA using aMA between September 2017 and October 2019. Fifty-two consecutive patients (61 knees) who underwent TKA using MA during the same period were assessed as the controlled group. The demographic data and perioperative data were recorded. The parameters of resection and soft tissue balance including tibia resection angle, frontal femoral angle, axial femoral angle, joint line translation, medial and lateral gap in extension and flexion position were recorded. Radiographic parameters and functional scores including the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) were evaluated. Surgery-related complications were recorded. The average follow-up was 3.5 years, with a minimum of 2.4 years. RESULTS: The frontal femoral angle was 2.55° ± 1.08° in aMA group versus 0.26° ± 0.60° in MA group (p < 0.001). The axial femoral angle was 3.07° ± 2.23° external in aMA group versus 2.30° ± 1.70° in MA group (p = 0.027). The lateral flexion gap was wider in the aMA group, with a mean of 0.71 mm more laxity (p = 0.001). Postoperative coronal alignment was 177.03° ± 1.82° in aMA group versus 178.14° ± 1.69° in MA group (p < 0.001). The coronal femoral component angle was 92.62° ± 2.78° in aMA group versus 90.85° ± 2.01° in MA group (p < 0.001). Both aMA-TKA and MA-TKA achieved satisfactory mid-term clinical outcomes. However, the HSS scores at 1 month postoperatively were significantly higher using aMA than using MA (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Navigation-assisted TKA using aMA technique obtained satisfactory mid-term clinical outcomes. The aMA technique aims to produce a biomimetic wider lateral flexion-extension gap and minimize releases of soft tissues, which might be associated with better early clinical outcomes than MA technique.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.232 · 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