MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417488785 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.17.017

A CADAVER BIOMECHANICAL COMPARISON OF THE PLATE CONSTRUCT FOR OPEN LAPIDUS FUSION VERSUS PERCUTANEOUS LAPIDUS FUSION USING SUBCHONDRAL FIXATION

2025· article· en· W4417488785 on OpenAlexaff
Alastair Younger, Stephen Steinlauf, Nathan R. Webb, Douglas Linton

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCadaverPercutaneousCadaveric spasmExtensometerSubchondral boneFixation (population genetics)Ankle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Tarsometatarsal (TMT) fusions traditionally use bridge plates or compression screws through open incisions to correct deformity and achieve bone healing. A new percutaneous technique can remove cartilage, preserve the subchondral bone and transfix the fusion site. Intraosseus, headless, chamfered, full-thread, non-variable pitch screws are used to transfix all available bone. This study compared the biomechanical properties of the plate construct versus the percutaneous construct. Method: TMT joints of six cadavers (12 limbs) were stabilized with a locking plate and 3.5 mm compression screw on one limb, and with a percutaneous Lapidus construct on the matched limb. An extensometer was placed on the plantar side of the TMT. The first metatarsal was point loaded cyclically from 9 to 90 N at 60 mm from the TMT joint at 3 Hz. Testing was stopped if the extensometer reached 7 mm of plantar gap, or when 250,000 cycles were reached. Specimens were then statically loaded to failure. Results: Percutaneous screw specimens reached more cycles to failure at 226,000 ± 58,000 versus 30,000 ± 52,000 for the open plate construct (p<.001). Plantar gap was higher in the open plate construct at all cycle counts from 10 to 10,000 cycles (>4 mm) versus the percutaneous group (<1 mm). Maximum load was higher in the percutaneous group (343.3 ± 92.8 N versus 247.3 ± 28.3 N) (p<.05). Stiffness of the percutaneous group was higher (40.9 ± 13.4 N/mm versus 16.0 ± 5.3 N/mm) (p<.01). No differences were found in bone quality testing. A Cox proportional hazard model identified the mode of fixation as the only significant covariant (p<.05) in predicting cycles to failure. Conclusion: The percutaneous subchondral fixation fusion construct with full-thread, non-variable pitch, intraosseous screws create a stiffer and stronger fixation construct than dorsal plates and cross-screws.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207