MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392577846 · doi:10.29007/gxn3

Measured Resection and Gap Balancing Techniques Result in Similar Femoral Component Rotations Regardless of Preoperative Coronal Deformity: A Database Analysis of 3922 Cases

2024· article· en· W4392577846 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Hickey, Asim Khan, Joseph Baines, David J. Allen, Findlay Welsh, Kamal Deep, Alistair Ewen, François Leitner, Antony J. Hodgson, F. Picard

Bibliographic record

VenueEPiC series in health sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronal planeDeformityMedicineArthroplastyVarus deformityImplantFEMORAL CONDYLEOrthodonticsResectionTotal knee arthroplastySurgeryRadiologyOsteoarthritisAnatomyCartilage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common goal in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is to obtain collateral ligament balance in both flexion and extension while maintaining neutral overall coronal alignment. Femoral component rotation is a key variable in achieving this goal. There are two prominent techniques used in TKA to determine implant orientation, measured resection and gap balancing, but there is some controversy over which technique is superior. At our institution, we regularly use both techniques over a wide range of patients with varying degrees of preoperative coronal deformity. We therefore asked, using intraoperative measurements from a surgical navigation system, can we detect significant differences in external rotation of the femoral component between measured resection and gap balancing techniques, and do any such differences occur more frequently or at higher levels at particular values of preoperative coronal deformity? We analysed 3922 navigated TKA cases undertaken at our institution which had complete measurements of preoperative overall coronal alignment and external rotation of the femoral component relative to the dorsal condyles line. We then compared cases using measured resection to those using the gap balancing technique, stratifying patients by degree of preoperative coronal deformity and applying a two-sample t-test. A total of 1969 cases that used measured resection and 1953 cases that used the gap balancing techniques were identified. We found no significant differences between the two techniques across most of the preoperative coronal deformity groupings, though small differences were detected in two specific subgroups: the femoral component was slightly more externally rotated in the measured resection cohort when the preoperative coronal deformity was between neutral and 50 valgus (mean ± standard deviation - measured resection: 3.60 ± 1.10, gap balancing: 3.00 ± 1.10, p < 0.00625) and between 50 valgus and 100 valgus (measured resection: 4.30 ± 1.40, gap balancing: 3.70 ± 1.30, p < 0.00625). This study has shown that there were essentially no substantial differences between the external rotation of the femoral component between the gap balancing and measured resection techniques regardless of the degree of preoperative coronal deformity. Overall, we feel that surgical decisions regarding which technique to use should be based more on any correlations with other patient outcome measures that may be better elucidated in future studies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEPiC series in health sciencesSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207