MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404093284 · doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000005206

Impact of Knee Osteoarthritis and Arthroplasty on Full-body Sagittal Alignment in Adult Spinal Deformity Patients

2024· article· en· W4404093284 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Daher, Alan H. Daniels, Ashley Knebel, Mariah Balmaceno-Criss, Renaud Lafage, Lawrence G. Lenke, Christopher P. Ames, Douglas C. Burton, Stephen M. Lewis, Eric O. Klineberg, Robert K. Eastlack, Munish C. Gupta, Gregory M. Mundis, Jeffrey L. Gum, Kojo Hamilton, Richard A. Hostin, Peter G. Passias, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Khaled M. Kebaish, Han Jo Kim, Frank J. Schwab, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Justin S. Smith, Breton Line, Shay Bess, Virginie Lafage, Bassel G. Diebo

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScoliosis diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisArthroplastyRadiographySagittal planeKnee replacementRetrospective cohort studySpinal deformitySurgeryDeformityRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the impact of knee osteoarthritis (OA) and knee arthroplasty on alignments and patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMS) of patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) corrective surgery. BACKGROUND: The relationship between knee OA and spinal alignment in patients with ASD is incompletely understood. It is also unknown how patients with knee arthroplasty and ASD compare to ASD patients with native knees. METHODS: Baseline full-body radiographs were used, and hip and knee OA were graded by two independent reviewers using the KL classification. Spinopelvic parameters and PROMs were compared across the different knee OA groups and compared between patients with knee replacement and native knees. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-nine patients with bilateral nonsevere OA (G1), 31 patients with unilateral severe knee OA (G2), and 60 patients with bilateral severe knee OA (G3). Patients with severe knee OA presented with worse spinopelvic parameters. However, after multivariable regression analysis controlling for age, frailty, PI, T1PA, knee OA was an independent predictor of knee flexion (G1: -0.02±7.3, G2: 7.8±9.4, G3: 4.5±8.7, P <0.001), and ankle dorsiflexion (G1: 2.3±4.0, G2: 6.6±4.5, G3: 5.1±4.1, P <0.001). There was no difference in PROMs ( P >0.05). Secondary analysis included 96 patients: 48 patients (50%) with nonsevere knee OA, and 48 patients (50%) with knee replacement. There was no difference in radiographic parameters or PROMs between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of complex ASD patients, patients with worse spinal deformities were more likely to have concomitant knee OA. Knee OA was shown to be a predictor of knee flexion and ankle dorsiflexion angles, but was not associated with worse PROMs in this study population. Patients with knee arthroplasty, however, had comparable spinal alignment and PROMs relative to those with mild OA.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicScoliosis diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207