MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405384932 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087552

Knee osteotomy combined with meniscal allograft transplantation versus knee osteotomy alone in patients with unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis: a prospective double-blind randomised controlled trial protocol

2024· article· en· W4405384932 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
L Zanasi, Angelo Boffa, Luca De Marziani, Gina Lisignoli, Claudio Belvedere, Marco Miceli, Stefano Zaffagnini, Giuseppe Filardo, Alessandro Di Martino

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistero della Salute
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisHigh tibial osteotomyOsteotomyVisual analogue scaleTransplantationSurgeryRange of motion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Knee osteotomy combined with meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) showed promising results to treat unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA) secondary to meniscal deficiency and knee malalignment. However, there is still no high-level evidence to demonstrate whether the combination of these two treatments is superior to osteotomy alone. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 52 patients with unicompartmental knee OA Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≤3 secondary to meniscal deficiency and knee malalignment (aged 20-60 years) are randomised to undergo knee osteotomy associated with MAT or knee osteotomy alone in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score at 12 months. The secondary outcomes are the IKDC subjective score at 1, 3 and 6 months, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, the Visual Analogue Scale, the EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, the Tegner Activity Level Scale, objective parameters (transpatellar circumference, suprapatellar circumference and range of motion), patient expectation on treatment efficacy and patient satisfaction at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Radiographs are performed at baseline and at 1-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups and magnetic resonance evaluations at baseline and at 12 months. Biomechanical assessment is performed through gait analysis before surgery and at 12 months, investigating motion data, biomechanical parameters and muscle activation through electromyography. In addition, to detect early joint environment changes and potential MAT effects in protecting the articular surface providing a better knee homeostasis, biological markers of cartilage turnover and inflammation obtained from synovial fluid, serum and urine are evaluated at baseline and at 24 hours, 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been approved by Emilia Romagna's Ethics Committee (CE-AVEC), Bologna, Italy. Written informed consent is obtained from all participants. Findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. PROTOCOL VERSION: March 2023. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05840887.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0060.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→