Functional outcome comparison of single-radius and multi-radius femur in total knee arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the clinical and functional results of single-radius (SR) and multi-radius (MR) femoral components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods: A total of 74 patients who underwent TKA surgery by a single surgeon between 2018 and 2021 were included in the study. The patients were then divided into 2 groups according to their femoral component design: group SR (38 patients) and group MR (36 patients). Except for gender and follow-up duration (P < .05), no significant difference was observed in age, American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, and BMI (P > .05). Knee range of motion, visual analogue scale (VAS), and combined KSS (Knee Society Score) were evaluated at the preoperative and final controls of the patients. In addition, frequency of anterior knee pain (AKP), AKP scale, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, and the Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS12) were evaluated at the final follow-up. Results: There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative range of motion (ROM), VAS, combined KSS, and HSS (P > .05). The frequency of AKP in patients with SR was found to be statistically lower than those with MR (P=.021; P < .05). The AKP scale was found to be statistically significantly lower in patients with prosthetic type MR compared to patients with SR (P=.04; P < .05). Singleradius patients had significantly better FJS-12 (P=.014; P < .05) and WOMAC scores (P=.003; P < .05). Conclusion: The results of this research showed that good clinical and functional results are obtained with TKA regardless of the femoral component design. Single-radius prostheses show better results than MR prostheses in terms of the frequency and severity of AKP. While there is no difference between femoral designs in terms of TKA-specific functional results such as KSS and HSS, the WOMAC score, which measures disease-related functions, provides better clinical results in SR designs. Additionally, SR designs show significantly better results in functional scores indicating patient satisfaction, such as FJS-12.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".