Comparison of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate with polyester mesh with standard suture and staples in total knee and hip arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The use of 2-octyl cyanoacrylate with polyester mesh (OCA-M) has become common in total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA, TKA). We aimed to compare the safety and cosmetic outcomes between OCA-M and standard suture techniques and staples, and determine whether OCA-M can safely be used for TKA. METHOD: Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent THA or TKA from January 2010 to October 2011 (Suture group), November 2011 to August 2013 (Staple group), March 2017 to September 2018 (OCA-M group). Exclusion criteria was loss of imaging data. Complications during hospitalisation (early complication) and after discharge (late complication) were compared in groups. Plastic and orthopaedic surgeons performed cosmetic evaluations with the modified Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and Likert scale at three and six months postoperatively and compared in groups. RESULTS: A total of 249 arthroplasties (suture group=88 patients; staple group=94 patients; OCA-M group=67 patients) were included in the study. The OCA-M group had a significantly lower early complication rate than the suture group (p=0.015). For THA, the OCA-M group had a significantly lower total complication rate than the suture group (p=0.048). For TKA, there was no significant difference among the three groups. The complication rate in the OCA-M group showed no significant difference between THA/TKA. With regards to the VSS, the OCA-M group was significantly better for cosmetic qualities than the suture group (p=<0.001, p=0.021 at three and six months, respectively). For the Likert scale, the OCA-M group was also significantly better for cosmetic qualities than the suture group and staple group (suture-OCA-M, p=0.003 (three months), p=<0.001 (six months); staple-OCA-M, p=0.027 (three months)). CONCLUSION: In this study, the OCA-M complication rate was low compared to suturing and similar to stapling. Moreover, better cosmetic outcomes were achieved compared to suturing and stapling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".