Gap patterns and radiographic follow-up of newer-generation cementless total knee arthroplasty designs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Interest in cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has increased with advancement of biomaterials and implant design and associated improved longevity. We sought to evaluate the gap patterns and radiolucent zones radiographically for 2 newer-generation cementless TKA designs. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our single-institution database between January 2017 and December 2019. We identified patients with a porous keeled tibia base-plate with 4-bullet cruciform spikes and peri-apatite coated femoral component (study group 1) and patients who received a cementless porous coated femoral component and rotating platform tibia baseplate with 4 peripheral porous coated pegs around a central cone (study group 2). We identified gap patterns at 6 weeks and at 1 year or more postoperatively on radiographs, noting indications for reoperation. Results: We identified 228 patients in study group 1 and 41 patients in study group 2. At 1-year follow-up, we found evidence of resolved femoral gaps in 52 (72.2%) of 72 patients in study group 1 and 10 (58.8%) of 17 patients in study group 2 (p = 0.124). We identified 27 (84.3%) of 32 patients in study group 1 and 7 (70.0%) of 10 patients in study group 2 with resolved tibia gaps (p = 0.313). After 1 year, there were significantly more Zone 3a femoral zonal radiolucent gaps (p = 0.001) and Zone 8 tibia zonal radiolucent gaps (p = 0.002) in study group 2 than in study group 1. There were 4 reoperations for study group 1 and 0 reoperations for study group 2. Conclusion: The modern cementless TKA systems have varied gap patterns in postoperative radiographs, which may be attributed to the implant design. Most radiolucent gaps resolve radiographically on follow-up.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".