Literature DB >> 31043672

Author Correction: Mechanical Metrics of the Proximal Tibia are Precise and Differentiate Osteoarthritic and Normal Knees: A Finite Element Study.

Hanieh Arjmand1, Majid Nazemi1, Saija A Kontulainen2, Christine E McLennan3, David J Hunter4, David R Wilson5, James D Johnston6.   

Abstract

A correction to this article has been published and is linked from the HTML and PDF versions of this paper. The error has not been fixed in the paper.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31043672      PMCID: PMC6494855          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-43379-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.379


Correction to: Scientific Reports 10.1038/s41598-018-29880-y, published online 31 July 2018 This Article contains errors in Tables 1 and 2 pertaining to sign convention. Specifically, minimum principal (compressive) strain measures in Table 2 were reported as positive whereas they should have been marked as negative, consistent with Table 1.
Table 1

Minimum principal stress comparison between OA and normal proximal tibia.

Minimum principal stress (MPa)All scansCV%RMSOA kneesNormal kneesDifference95% CIp-valueCohen’s d
MeanSDMean/Median*SDMean/Median*SDMean/Median*PercentLowerUpper
Medial peripheral cortical * 0.36 0.19 5.7 0.51 0.18 0.22 0.08 0.25 115.3% 0.360.11 0.006 1.36
Medial epiphyseal cortical 0.59 0.31 6.6 0.80 0.28 0.38 0.17 0.41 107.2% 0.680.14 0.006 1.33
Medial metaphyseal cortical * 2.06 0.88 7.7 2.56 0.95 1.38 0.27 1.18 85.2% 1.710.22 0.013 1.28
Medial subchondral cortical * 0.52 0.16 3.9 0.63 0.18 0.41 0.06 0.17 41.7% 0.350.02 0.018 1.22
Medial subchondral trabecular * 0.46 0.15 3.7 0.51 0.17 0.37 0.06 0.15 41.1% 0.330.01 0.035 1.13
Medial epiphyseal trabecular *−0.430.154.8−0.470.18−0.350.06−0.1233.2%−0.320.010.0851.03
Medial metaphyseal trabecular *−0.510.268.9−0.550.30−0.340.10−0.2163.0%−0.410.010.0641.01
Subchondral spine 0.30 0.10 5.3 0.37 0.07 0.24 0.08 0.14 56.9% 0.220.05 0.005 1.35
Epiphyseal central−0.140.068.2−0.160.03−0.140.07−0.0212.3%−0.080.050.5590.33
Metaphyseal central−0.120.047.3−0.130.03−0.120.05−0.013.8%−0.050.040.8380.12
Lateral subchondral cortical−0.320.095.0−0.350.11−0.290.06−0.0722.8%−0.170.030.1750.74
Lateral subchondral trabecular−0.250.074.6−0.260.08−0.250.06−0.026.3%−0.100.070.6980.22
Lateral epiphyseal trabecular−0.190.055.3−0.200.06−0.190.05−0.013.0%−0.070.060.8470.11
Lateral metaphyseal trabecular−0.150.0410.5−0.150.04−0.160.060.002.2%−0.050.060.8960.07
Lateral peripheral cortical−0.220.055.2−0.240.05−0.200.04−0.0422.4%−0.100.010.1040.87
Lateral epiphyseal cortical−0.250.065.9−0.290.06−0.230.04−0.0625.2%−0.120.000.0571.00
Lateral metaphyseal cortical−0.700.215.2−0.760.25−0.650.17−0.1117.1%−0.360.140.3460.53

Mean and SD of repeated scans for both OA and normal, CV%RMS, mean/median and SD for OA knees, mean/median and SD for normal knees, the difference between OA and normal knees (mean and percent relative to normal), 95% confidence of interval, p-value, and effect size (Cohen’s d) of minimum principal stress in different regions of proximal tibia. Measures with significant differences are shown with bold text in the table (p-value < 0.05).

(*) shows regions which were not normally distributed whereby median value used in Mann-Whitney U-tests for statistical comparison, and confidence intervals were calculated using Hodges-Lehmann estimator.

Table 2

Minimum principal strain comparison between OA and normal proximal tibia.

Minimum principal strain (microstrain)All scansCV%RMSOA kneesNormal kneesDifference95% CIp-valueCohen’s d
MeanSDMean/Median*SDMean/Median*SDMean/Median*PercentLowerUpper
Medial peripheral cortical−11855126.1−1135561−1236497101−8.2%−516+7190.7270.20
Medial epiphyseal cortical−14106014.2−1435666−1385582−503.6%−778+6780.8830.08
Medial metaphyseal cortical−11304184.7−1247433−1014399−23323.0%−718+2520.3160.56
Medial subchondral cortical *−5632035.6−536258−512143−163.1%−258+1640.9490.28
Medial subchondral trabecular *−7703226.5−743405−627189−11818.8%−636+1550.3380.64
Medial epiphyseal trabecular *−24059003.7−22941133−1990599−28114.1%−1403+5570.4060.49
Medial metaphyseal trabecular−21669334.7−23611096−1970771−39119.8%−1494+7120.4550.42
Subchondral spine *−8304037.2−749544−725186−273.7%−817+2820.8480.48
Epiphyseal central−26888793.2−28731015−2503752−37014.8%−1410+6700.4540.42
Metaphyseal central−18977894.9−2053921−1741668−31217.9%−1248+6250.4820.39
Lateral subchondral cortical−8623306.4−914410−809249−10613.1%−500+2890.5710.32
Lateral subchondral trabecular−13214475.2−1495548−1148249−34730.2%−843+1490.1540.78
Lateral epiphyseal trabecular *−25088603.9−24341006−1979611−55928.2%−1735+3460.1800.71
Lateral metaphyseal trabecular−19408297.5−2080948−1800738−28015.6%−1269+7090.5490.34
Lateral peripheral cortical *−11574925.7−933657−964236−101.0%−953+1940.8480.50
Lateral epiphyseal cortical−11054035.9−1181475−1030337−15114.7%−631+3290.5060.37
Lateral metaphyseal cortical−6702887.4−656274−68532330−4.3%−319+3780.8570.10

Mean and SD of repeated scans for both OA and normal, CV%RMS, mean/median and SD for OA knees, mean/median and SD for normal knees, the difference between OA and normal knees (mean and percent relative to normal), 95% confidence of interval, p-value, and effect size (Cohen’s d) of minimum principal strain in different regions of proximal tibia.

(*) shows regions which were not normally distributed whereby median value used in Mann-Whitney U-tests for statistical comparison, and confidence intervals were calculated using Hodges-Lehmann estimator.

In addition, in Tables 1 and 2, under the column heading ‘Difference’, “Absolute” should read: “Mean/Median*” As a result, in the legends of Tables 1 and 2, “(absolute and percent relative to normal)” should read: “(mean and percent relative to normal)” The correct Tables 1 and 2 appear below with their accompanying legends. Minimum principal stress comparison between OA and normal proximal tibia. Mean and SD of repeated scans for both OA and normal, CV%RMS, mean/median and SD for OA knees, mean/median and SD for normal knees, the difference between OA and normal knees (mean and percent relative to normal), 95% confidence of interval, p-value, and effect size (Cohen’s d) of minimum principal stress in different regions of proximal tibia. Measures with significant differences are shown with bold text in the table (p-value < 0.05). (*) shows regions which were not normally distributed whereby median value used in Mann-Whitney U-tests for statistical comparison, and confidence intervals were calculated using Hodges-Lehmann estimator. Minimum principal strain comparison between OA and normal proximal tibia. Mean and SD of repeated scans for both OA and normal, CV%RMS, mean/median and SD for OA knees, mean/median and SD for normal knees, the difference between OA and normal knees (mean and percent relative to normal), 95% confidence of interval, p-value, and effect size (Cohen’s d) of minimum principal strain in different regions of proximal tibia. (*) shows regions which were not normally distributed whereby median value used in Mann-Whitney U-tests for statistical comparison, and confidence intervals were calculated using Hodges-Lehmann estimator.
  1 in total

1.  Tranexamic Acid Is Beneficial to Patients Undergoing Open-Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy.

Authors:  De-Sheng Chen; Jia-Wang Zhu; Tong-Fu Wang; Bo Zhu; Cai-Hong Feng
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-11-04       Impact factor: 3.411

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.