Decreased posterior tibial slope is a risk factor for primary posterior cruciate ligament rupture and posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction failure: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine bony knee morphological factors associated with primary posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) rupture or PCL graft failure after PCL reconstruction. METHODS: Three databases, namely MEDLINE, PubMed and EMBASE, were searched on 30th May 2023. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data such as receiver operating characteristic curve parameters, as well as p-values for comparisons of values between patients with PCL pathology and control patients, were recorded. RESULTS: Nine studies comprising 1054 patients were included. Four studies reported that patients with PCL injury had flatter medial posterior tibial slopes (MTS) than controls, with mean values of 4.3 (range: 3.0-7.0) and 6.5 (range: 5.0-9.2) degrees, respectively. Two studies reported an MTS cutoff value ranging below 3.90-3.93° being a significant risk factor for primary PCL rupture or PCL graft failure. Two studies reported that shallow medial tibial depths were associated with primary PCL rupture, with mean values of 2.1 (range: 2.0-2.2) and 2.6 (range: 2.4-2.7) mm in PCL injury and control groups, respectively. Stenotic intercondylar notches and femoral condylar width were not consistently associated with PCL injuries. CONCLUSION: Decreased MTS is associated with primary PCL rupture and graft failure after PCL reconstruction with values below 3.93° being considered as a significant risk factor. Less common risk factors include shallow medial tibial depth, while femoral condylar width and parameters with regards to the intercondylar notch, such as notch width, notch width index and intercondylar notch volume, demonstrated conflicting associations with primary or secondary PCL injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
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 | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".