Evaluation and Management of Knee Dislocations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knee dislocations (KDs) are potentially limb-threatening injuries characterized by complete displacement of the tibiofemoral articulation. Historically, most KDs resulted from high-energy trauma and sporting activities. However, KDs occurring in morbidly obese patients from low-energy falls, termed "ultra-low-velocity KDs," are becoming more common. Prompt evaluation and recognition are key to achieving a timely reduction and avoiding potentially devastating complications resulting from popliteal artery injury. A suspected KD should be monitored with serial examinations to assess the vascular status. Emergent vascular surgery consultation is indicated for limbs that have evidence of vascular compromise. KDs that cannot be reduced through closed means should be taken to the operating room emergently for open reduction. Temporary external fixation should be reserved for knees that remain subluxated or grossly unstable after reduction or bracing treatment, in cases with severe open wounds, associated extremity fractures that require stabilization, and in select cases requiring vascular intervention. Controversies in definitive management remain regarding timing of ligament stabilization, repair vs. reconstruction of injured ligaments, and single vs. staged treatment. Complications associated with KDs include vascular injuries with limb loss, arthrofibrosis, compartment syndrome, infection, heterotopic ossification, and nerve recovery challenges and recurrent laxity. Ongoing level 1 clinical trials are being conducted to determine optimal timing of both ligamentous reconstruction and postoperative rehabilitation. Despite the severity of these injuries, many patients are able to return to work and sport-related activities.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".