Clinical Outcomes of Lunocapitate Arthrodesis: A Retrograde Single-Screw Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A single-site retrospective study was designed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of single-screw lunocapitate arthrodesis (LCA) using a retrograde approach for the treatment of scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC) wrist. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 31 patients (33 cases) between September 2010 and December 2019 with SLAC wrist changes who were treated with single-screw LCA. Objective outcomes included time to fusion, union rate, range of motion, and grip and pinch strength recovery. Subjective outcomes included Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores. RESULTS: We report on 33 cases (7 female), mean age 58.4 years (range: 41-85), with SLAC wrist who underwent LCA. Our cohort reported a 94% union rate and a 90-day mean time to fusion. Final active wrist range of motion was 38° dorsiflexion, 35° volarflexion, 17° radial deviation, 17° ulnar deviation, 82° pronation, and 83° supination (mean: 450.8 days). Final grip and pinch strengths recovered was 75% gross grip, 84% lateral pinch, and 75% precision pinch (mean: 379.0 days) compared with the contralateral side. The mean postoperative DASH score was 27 (mean: 1203.9 days). Two nonunions were observed. Two hardware complications occurred: one symptomatic screw and one screw fatigue fracture. CONCLUSIONS: We found retrograde single-screw LCA to be an effective salvage procedure for SLAC wrist. LCA is a less-taxing procedure, requires shorter operating time, and produces range of motion and grip and pinch strength recovery comparable to those of 4-corner arthrodesis. Furthermore, the viability of single-screw fixation may reduce hardware-related operative costs without compromising union rates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".