MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410936461 · doi:10.1002/jeo2.70288

The positive impact of robotic‐assisted BCR TKA on post‐operative joint line restoration, lateral posterior condylar offset and standard and advanced activity in the 2011 Knee Society Score than the conventional jig‐based technique

2025· article· en· W4410936461 on OpenAlex
Takao Kaneko, Kosuke Shiga, Ayakane Yamamoto, Kazuki Amemiya, Masaru Omata, Shu Yoshizawa

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Orthopaedics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondyleOrthopedic surgeryOffset (computer science)MedicineJoint (building)Knee JointOrthodonticsSurgeryEngineeringComputer scienceCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose The aim of this study was to compare post‐operative short‐term patient‐reported outcome measurements (PROMs) between robotic‐assisted (RA) and the conventional jig‐based technique using bi‐cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty (BCR TKA). Methods This retrospective single‐surgeon consecutive cohort analysis compares 33 RA‐BCR TKA patients (Robot group) to 32 conventional TKA patients (Conventional group). Lateral distal femoral angle (LDFA), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA), femoral and tibial component rotational alignment, distal and posterior femoral osteotomy (mm) were compared between the two groups using three‐dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) measurements. 2011 Knee Society Score (KSS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Forgotten Joint Score and Patella score were collected more than 1 year after surgery. Results Pre‐operative knee scores were significantly higher in the Robot group (mean: 20.5) than in the Conventional group (mean: 16.8), while functional scores were significantly lower in the Robot group (mean: 57.7) than in the Conventional group (mean: 69.6). The Robot group showed significantly greater improvements in post‐operative extension angle ( p < 0.01), and standard and advanced activity in the 2011 KSS ( p < 0.01). LDFA, MPTA and rotational alignment of the femoral and tibial components showed no significant difference between the two groups. Medial distal femoral osteotomy (mm) was significantly greater in the Conventional group ( p < 0.01). Lateral posterior femoral osteotomy (mm) was significantly greater in the Robot group ( p < 0.01). The robotic group had significantly more cases of joint line restoration and reduced lateral posterior condylar offset than the Conventional group. Conclusions RA‐BCR TKA improved post‐operative extension angle and standard and advanced activity in the 2011 KSS more than the Conventional TKA. Level of Evidence Level III.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.310 · 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