MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7083434141 · doi:10.1177/2325967125s00062

Paper 05: Clinical Outcomes and Accuracy of Patient-Specific Instrumentation for Corrective High Tibial and Distal Femoral Osteotomy

2025· article· en· W7083434141 on OpenAlex

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

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeodetic Measurements and Engineering Structures
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronal planeHigh tibial osteotomyOsteoarthritisInstrumentation (computer programming)OsteotomyOrthopedic surgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: High tibial osteotomies (HTO) and distal femoral osteotomies (DFO) may be used for a variety of knee pathologies including unicompartmental cartilage disorders and ligamentous instability. A novel instrumentation system for osteotomies utilizing three-dimensional patient-specific instrumentation (3D-PSI) cutting guides has been recently described, however there is limited reporting on the clinical outcomes and accuracy of this system. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and accuracy of correction of a 3D-PSI osteotomy system for HTO’s and DFO’s. It was hypothesized that patients would have significant improvements in patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores and that at least 90% of patients would have coronal alignment within 10% of the planned correction. Methods: A prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent opening wedge (oW) or closing wedge (cW) HTO or DFO utilizing a 3D-PSI system (Fine Osteotomy, Bodycad, Canada) from October 2020 to January 2022 was reviewed.Preoperatively and postoperatively, PROs were collected, including the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC), San Francisco 12 physical component score and mental component scores (SF-12 PCS and MCS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) including the stiffness (WOMAC-stiff), pain (WOMAC-pain), physical function (WOMAC-PF) and total (WOMAC-total) scores, the Lysholm score, Tegner activity scale, and subjective satisfaction (1-10 scale, with 10 indicating maximum satisfaction). A paired t-test was used to evaluate for differences in PRO’s from pre- to postoperatively. To assess coronal and mechanical alignment, mechanical medial tibial width ratio (mMTWr), defined as the distance from the medial aspect of the tibia to the point on the tibia where the mechanical axis intersects the tibial plateau divided by the entire width of the tibial plateau, was measured on standing whole-leg radiographs ( Figure 1 ). Radiographic measurements were performed by two blinded independent raters. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to determine inter-observer reliability for radiographic measurements between raters and reliability between the raters and the Bodycad software’s pre-operative measurements. To analyze correction accuracy, the differences between the planned final mMTWR based on the preoperative plan and actual measured mMTWr ( Figure 2 ) as well as the percentage of patients within 10% of the planned mMTWR were calculated. This 10% threshold was based on prior studies and corresponds to approximately 2 degrees of tibiofemoral angle. Results: Complete data sets were obtained for 23 cases (16 oW-HTO, 4 oW-DFO, 2 cW-DFO, 1 combined cW-HTO + oW-DFO) at mean follow-up of 2.6 years. Demographics for the cohort are shown in Table 1 . Using a Bonferroni-corrected P value (p<0.006), there were significant improvements from pre- to post-operatively in IKDC, Lysholm, WOMAC-pain, WOMAC-stiffness, WOMAC-physical function, and WOMAC-total scores ( Table 2 ). The ICC’s for pre- and post-operative mMTWR measurements were 0.996 and 0.982, respectively, indicating near perfect agreement. The ICC between the raters pre-operative measurements of mMTWr on whole-leg standing radiographs and the Bodycad measurements of mMTWr based on the 3D CT was 0.985. 89% of patients were within 10% of the planned final mMTWR, and the median difference between the planned and actual correction was 3.7% (95% CI, 2.8 – 8.4). Excluding patients who underwent removal of hardware, 22% (5/23) of patients had at least one related reoperation. Survivorship, defined as patients who did not undergo revision osteotomy or arthroplasty, was 21/23 knees (91%). Conclusions: This study found that patients who underwent corrective HTO or DFO using PSI had significant improvements in PRO’s, and there was good accuracy, 89%, of coronal correction. These findings demonstrate that osteotomy utilizing 3D-PSI can lead to clinically meaningful improvements in patient function with high accuracy of planned correction. While the median difference of 3.7% between the planned and actual correction is less than 1 degree, the presence of outliers emphasizes the importance of meticulous surgical technique and abiding by osteotomy principles even when utilizing 3D PSI. This study adds to a growing body of literature that corrective osteotomies can significantly improve patients’ quality of life and knee function in the treatment of chondral and meniscal pathologies and provides early data on the accuracy and outcomes of a newly released 3D PSI osteotomy system for HTO’s and DFO’s.

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)0.000
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 score0.687
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.253 · 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