MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Concomitant Extensor Pollicis Longus and Extensor Digitorum Longus Tendon Rupture may Complicate Surgical Reconstruction following Volar Plate Fixation of the Distal Radius: A Case Report

2023· article· en· W4381093883 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Paul, Jonathan Persitz, Andrea Chan, Nina Suh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Case Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversitySt Joseph's Health CareToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryTendon ruptureTendonConcomitantDistal radius fractureFixation (population genetics)ComplicationWristPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Hardware prominence is one of the major established complications following volar plating of distal radius fractures. In particular, dorsal prominence of screws is the leading risk factor associated with post-surgical extensor pollicis longus (EPL) tendon rupture. Although there are many descriptions of attritional EPL ruptures in the literature, concomitant presentation of attritional EPL and extensor digitorum communis (EDC) ruptures following volar plating of distal radius fractures are minimal. Case Report: We present a case of concomitant rupture of the EPL and occult rupture of the EDC to the index finger following volar plating of the distal radius. This was discovered intraoperatively and complicated the proposed tendon transfer reconstruction. Conclusion: Locked volar plate fixation has become the preferred technique for surgical management of distal radius fractures. The complication of multiple extensor tendon ruptures is rare but nevertheless may be encountered. We discuss strategies for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention. Surgeons should be aware of and prepared to proceed with alternative reconstructive procedures if this complication is discovered.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.791

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic Case ReportsSame topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207