MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403989217 · doi:10.1186/s12891-024-08004-w

Efficacy and safety of high tibial osteotomy combined with platelet-rich plasma for treating knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Chinese population

2024· review· en· W4403989217 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wenbin Zhang, Yulin Ma, Feilong Lu, Hao Song, Yimei Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSichuan Provincial Administration of Traditional Chinese MedicineChengdu UniversityJiangxi University of Traditional Chinese MedicineChengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisMeta-analysisHigh tibial osteotomySports medicinePlatelet-rich plasmaOrthopedic surgeryPhysical therapyRheumatologyRehabilitationPopulationSurgeryInternal medicineAlternative medicinePlateletPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the clinical efficacy and safety of high tibial osteotomy (HTO) combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and to provide evidence of the effectiveness of evidence-based medicine for treating this disease. METHODS: Clinical studies on the use of HTO combined with PRP for the treatment of KOA before September 2024 were identified. The literature that met the inclusion criteria was strictly screened out, the literature information was extracted, and the data were input into RevMan5.4 for analysis. RESULTS: Ten studies (12 controls) with 625 patients were included. Overall, the visual analog scale (VAS) score (mean difference (MD) = -0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) (-0.76, -0.31), P < 0.00001), range of motion (ROM) (MD = 7.24, 95% CI (2.79, 11.69), P = 0.001), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score (MD = -6.91, 95% CI (-9.47, -4.34), P < 0.00001), cartilage recovery (cartilage thickness: MD = 0.43, 95% CI (0.35, 0.51), P < 0.00001; cartilage regeneration: relative risk (RR) = 1.81, 95% CI (1.40, 2.33), P < 0.00001; and the International Cartilage Repair Society (ICRS) grade: RR = 1.96, 95% CI (1.44, 2.66), P < 0.0001), and the Lysholm score (MD = 6.51, 95% CI (4.97, 8.04), P < 0.00001) after HTO-PRP treatment had certain advantages compared to the control group. After treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in the knee joint mechanical axis angle between the HTO-PRP group and the control group (femoral tibial angle (FTA): MD = -0.29, 95% CI (-1.07, 0.49), P = 0.47; medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA): MD = 0.19, 95% CI (-0.49, 0.88), P = 0.58; posterior tibial slope (PTS): MD = -0.12, 95% CI (-0.49, 0.25), P = 0.53; knee varus angle (KVA): MD = -0.30, 95% CI (-1.77, 1.17), P = 0.69; weight-bearing line (WBL): MD = 1.10, 95% CI (-0.89, 3.09), P = 0.28). CONCLUSION: The results showed that in the treatment of KOA, the HTO-PRP group had better efficacy than the control groups did and had certain safety reliability.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Musculoskeletal DisordersSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207