EFFECT OF LATERAL MENISCUS POSTERIOR ROOT TEARS ON CARTILAGE AND MENISCAL MECHANICS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Measuring cartilage and meniscal mechanics in loaded knees is essential to understanding the effects of lateral meniscus posterior root tears (LMPRTs) and the effectiveness of meniscal repair procedures that seek to protect the joint from degeneration. Studies have assessed mechanics with thin-film pressure sensors or finite element models, but their conclusions are limited by the invasiveness or inherent assumptions of the techniques employed. Ultra-high field MRI provides sufficient resolution to measure cartilage and meniscal mechanics during loading in a compatible loading device, without requiring disruption or simulation of the articulating joint surfaces. However, no studies have evaluated the impact of LMPRTs on the cartilage and meniscal mechanics in a human cadaveric knee using such a method. OBJECTIVE Test the hypothesis that LMPRTs increase femoral and tibial cartilage strain and meniscal extrusion. METHODS Six human knee lateral compartments (mean age 70 yrs) were tested. Anatomical alignment in full extension was maintained during preparation. The lateral meniscus and its roots, meniscotibial ligament, and attachment to the popliteus, as well as the ACL, were preserved. Specimens were placed in a novel pneumatic compression apparatus customized for use a 9.4T MRI scanner. Morphologic scans with a resolution of 0.06 × 0.12 × 0.4 mm were acquired before loading and after 2 hours of loading (Figure 1). The load applied was constant and equivalent to 48% body weight to simulate two-legged standing. An artificial LMPRT was then created, and specimens were left unloaded until testing the next day with the same protocol. Joint tissues were manually segmented for both intact and LMPRT conditions, in both loaded and unloaded states. Flattened cartilage profiles were generated to calculate cartilage strain in the axial direction, with negative strain indicating compression. The mean and maximum strains in the tibiofemoral contact area were determined in both the femoral and tibial cartilage. Meniscal extrusion was measured as the perpendicular distance between the external edge of the meniscus and the line bisecting the external edge of the tibial plateau and femoral condyle in the most anterior slice of the popliteus’ insertion. All measures were compared between conditions with paired Student’s t-tests with significance set to 0.05. RESULTS Maximum compressive strain in the tibiofemoral contact region of the femoral (p = 0.013) and tibial (p = 0.010) cartilage increased significantly after the LMPRT (Figure 2). The increase in mean compressive strain in the tibiofemoral contact region after the LMPRT was not significantly different for the femoral (p = 0.103) or tibial (p = 0.065) cartilage. Likewise, the increase in meniscal extrusion after the LMPRT was not significantly different (p = 0.143). Specimens with a greater increase in meniscal extrusion after the LMPRT tended to have a greater increase in maximum cartilage strain after the LMPRT. CONCLUSION Increases in maximum cartilage strain after LMPRT reflect higher cartilage stress, which is associated with cartilage degeneration. Our finding of more meniscal extrusion in specimens with greater increases in cartilage strain highlights a potential relationship between cartilage and meniscal mechanics, as well as the importance of restoring normal meniscal mechanics through a LMPRT repair. A key advantage of this approach to studying knee mechanics is the ability to simultaneously assess meniscal and cartilage mechanics with minimal disruption to the alignment and critical soft tissue. The approach has potential for assessment of the effectiveness of meniscal repair techniques.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".