Does the femoral component design modified in consideration of Asian anatomical characteristics fit better than the conventional design for Korean femora in reality?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We aimed to investigate the anatomical and clinical advantages of an Asian-specific femoral component design with a high femoral aspect ratio, compared with the conventional femoral component design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the operation and outpatient clinic records of 239 knees operated on using an anatomically modified femoral component design (MFCD, Group A) and 153 knees operated on using a conventional femoral component design (CFCD, Group B) in Korean patients was performed. Three subgroups were created based on the mediolateral size of the two different femoral component designs. The geometric accommodation of each femoral component was assessed using intraoperatively measured femoral posterior condylar resection and posterior condylar trimming amounts. Clinical outcomes were assessed using a range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcome measurements. RESULTS: In the comparison between Groups A and B, the mean combined bilateral posterior condylar trimming (XPCT) was 2.91 [2SD: - 4.12-9.94] and 1.45 [2SD: - 5.89-8.80], and the median XPCT was 3 and 1.5. In the largest subgroup (subgroup 2), Groups A and B included 100 and 112 patients, all six posterior condylar resection and trimming parameters were significantly larger in Group A. Preoperative and postoperative ROM and Hospital for Special Surgery scores were similar between the two groups. Preoperative Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) was higher in Group A. However, postoperative WOMAC was similar between the groups. Perioperative improvement in WOMAC index was significantly greater in Group B. CONCLUSIONS: The Asian-specific femoral component design resulted in more resection and trimming of the femoral posterior condyle than the conventional design despite it was not associated with different clinical outcomes. Surgeons should be aware of unexpected excessive posterior condylar resection and formation of large flexion gap when using femoral component design with high femoral aspect ratio.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".