MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405472618 · doi:10.3390/jcm13247672

The Etiology of Total Knee Arthroplasty Failure Influences on Improvement in Knee Function: A Follow-Up Study

2024· article· en· W4405472618 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lisa Seifert, Moritz Oltmanns, Farouk Khury, Ralf Bieger, Martin Faschingbauer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineArthrofibrosisEtiologyTotal knee arthroplastySurgeryPeriprostheticAseptic processingWOMACArthroplastyRehabilitationCohortRange of motionOsteoarthritisInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revisions are variable, and it is hypothesized that the underlying cause of primary TKA failure impacts postoperative outcomes. This study analyzes the results of TKA revisions seven years after surgery, in relation to the etiology of primary failure and other influencing factors. A previous study conducted in 2013 examined the same cohort of patients three months after revision surgery. Methods: From the original study, 97 patients were followed up, and 49 patients were eligible for inclusion. Patients were classified into four groups: “periprosthetic infection” (PPI), “aseptic loosening,” “instability,” and “arthrofibrosis.” Outcomes were analyzed using established scores (the Knee Society Score (KSS), New Knee Society Score (nKSS), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) index) and considering factors such as age, gender, BMI, and ASA classification. The outcomes were analyzed using three time intervals: “Outcome Short” (preoperative to 3 months postoperative); “Outcome Long” (preoperative to 7 years postoperative); and “Delta PostOP” (3 months postoperative to 7 years postoperative). Results: Significant improvements were observed in all time intervals, especially in the “Outcome Short” (p < 0.001) and “Delta PostOP” (p < 0.001) periods. The “instability” and “aseptic loosening” groups showed better outcomes in terms of range of motion and knee scores than the “arthrofibrosis” and “infection” groups (p < 0.05). A lower BMI and an ASA status of II were associated with better outcomes (p < 0.05). Women also showed superior results in the nKSS (p < 0.05). Discussion: Patients with “aseptic loosening” and “instability” had the best long-term outcomes. Lower BMI and better ASA status also correlated with improved results. These findings can inform patients of the potential outcomes of revision surgery, thereby facilitating informed decision-making.

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 score0.003
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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes→French-language works237,207→