MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412347486 · doi:10.1177/23259671251344944

Simulated Biomechanical Analysis of Optimal Knee Alignment for Treating Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Tears

2025· article· en· W4412347486 on OpenAlexaff
Takaaki Hiranaka, Adam Garry Redgrift, Yizhao Li, Larissa Michele Madia, Ryan Willing, Alan Getgood

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTotal Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes
Canadian institutionsFowler Kennedy Sport Medicine ClinicWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCadaveric spasmMedial meniscusHigh tibial osteotomyTearsKnee flexionRange of motionBiomechanicsKnee JointValgusAnatomyOsteoarthritisOrthodonticsSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy (MOWHTO) is used to correct varus alignment; however, the optimal knee alignment during MOWHTO for medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMPRTs) remains unclear. Purpose: To determine the optimal biomechanical knee alignment for MMPRT treatment during MOWHTO. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: This study used 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric legs from human donors (mean age, 61.3 years [range, 33-75 years]). A joint motion simulator assessed the weightbearing line (WBL) from 30% to 70% (0%: medial border; 100%: lateral border), simulating MOWHTO. Tibiofemoral peak contact pressure (PCP) and mean contact pressure (MCP) were measured using a pressure sensor under a 700-N load. MMPRTs were created via a femoral posterior approach and repaired with suture anchors. Measurements were taken in the intact, MMPRT, and repair conditions at alignments of 30% to 70% WBL, with neutral alignment defined as 50% WBL. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way analysis of variance with the Tukey post hoc test. Results: In the medial compartment, PCP was increased by 43% in the MMPRT condition compared with the intact condition at neutral alignment ( P = .012). MCP was also significantly increased by 57% in the MMPRT condition compared with the intact condition ( P = .006). At varus alignment, PCP and MCP increased in all conditions, with the largest statistically significant differences observed at 30% WBL ( P = .002 and P < .001, respectively). PCP and MCP at neutral alignment in the intact condition were comparable with those at 60% to 65% WBL in the MMPRT condition and at 50% to 55% WBL in the repair condition. In the lateral compartment, PCP and MCP increased at valgus alignment, with no significant differences among conditions. Conclusion: MCP at neutral alignment in the intact condition was similar to that at 60% to 65% WBL in the MMPRT condition and at 50% to 55% WBL in the repair condition, indicating optimal biomechanical alignment targets for MOWHTO in patients with MMPRTs. 50–55% WBL corresponds to slight valgus alignment. Neutral alignment was not considered ideal in this context. Clinical Relevance: These findings provide biomechanical evidence to guide optimal knee alignment during MOWHTO for MMPRTs, potentially improving patient outcomes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicTotal Knee Arthroplasty OutcomesFrench-language works237,207