MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394818897 · doi:10.1177/10711007241241075

Biomechanical Effects of Hindfoot Alignment in Supination External Rotation Malleolar Fractures: A Human Cadaveric Model

2024· article· en· W4394818897 on OpenAlexaff
Angela Seidel, Amal Chidda, Virginie Perez, Fabian Krause, Ivan Zderic, Boyko Gueorguiev, Karl‐André Lalonde, Brad Meulenkamp

Bibliographic record

VenueFoot & Ankle International · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
FundersDeutschen Arthrose-HilfeSchweizerische Gesellschaft für Orthopädie und Traumotologie
KeywordsValgusMedicineDeltoid ligamentCadaveric spasmAnkleDeltoid curveOrthodonticsCadaverLigamentAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Pressure distribution in the ankle joint is known to be dependent on various factors, including hindfoot alignment. We seek to evaluate how hindfoot alignment affects contact pressures in the ankle joint in the setting of supination external rotation (SER) type ankle fractures. Methods: SER fractures were created in 10 human cadaver lower extremity specimens, simulating progressive stages of injury: without fracture (step 0), SER fracture and intact deltoid ligament (step 1), superficial deltoid ligament disruption (step 2), and deep deltoid ligament disruption (step 3). At each step, varus and valgus alignment was simulated by displacing the calcaneal tuberosity 7 mm medial or lateral. Each limb was axially loaded following each osteotomy at a static load of 350 N. The center of force (COF), contact area (CA), and peak contact pressure (PP) under load were measured, and radiographs of the ankle mortise were taken to analyze the medial clear space (MCS) and talar tilt (TT). Results: The COF (5.3 mm, P = .030) and the CA (−188.4 mm 2 , P = .015) changed in step 3 in the valgus hindfoot alignment compared to baseline parameters, indicating the importance of deep deltoid ligament integrity in maintaining normal ankle joint contact stress in the valgus hindfoot. These changes were not seen in the setting of varus alignment (COF: 2.3 mm, P = .059; CA −121 mm 2 , P = .133). PP were found to not change significantly in either varus or valgus (varus: −4.9 N, P = .132; valgus: −4 N, P = .464). The MCS demonstrated widening in step 3 compared to step 2 (0.7 mm, P = .020) in both varus and valgus hindfoot. The TT increased significantly in step 3 in the valgus hindfoot (2.8 degrees, P = .020) compared to step 0. Conclusion: SER-IV fractures with valgus hindfoot alignment showed significant changes in pressure distribution and radiographic parameters when compared to SER-IV fractures with varus hindfoot alignment. Clinical Relevance: Based on this cadaver modeling study, patients with SERIV fracture with varus hindfoot alignment and complete deltoid ligament lesion may not need fracture fixation, whereas those with valgus hindfoot alignment likely need fracture fixation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFoot & Ankle InternationalSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207