RETRIEVAL ANALYSIS OF OXIDISED ZIRCONIUM FEMORAL HEADS USED IN PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Detailed analysis of retrieved total hip replacements (THRs) is valuable for assessing implant and material successes and failures. Reduction of bearing wear and corrosion and fretting of the head-neck trunnion is essential to implant durability and patient health. This research quantifies and characterizes taper and bearing surface damage on retrieved oxidized zirconium THRs. Methods Initially, 11 retrieved oxidized zirconium femoral heads were examined along with their associated femoral stems. Relevant patient and retrieval data was collected from clinical charts and radiographs. Taper corrosion (Figure 1) and fretting damage (Figure 2) scoring was performed following the Dyrkacz [1] method. A coordinate measuring machine was used to obtain a detailed surface map of the male and female taper surfaces. Taper surface maps were best-fit with an idealized cone followed by volume subtraction to quantify the amount of material removed as a result of fretting and corrosion processes. Scanning electron microscopy was performed on select samples to identify specific damage modes. Unique surface bumps were noted on the articular surface of select femoral heads (Figure 3). Seventeen femoral heads were added to the analysis specifically for identification of these bumps. Articular surfaces were searched under SEM magnification and bumps were identified and counted. Parametric statistical correlations were performed with SAS v9.3. Results Mean patient age was 61 years (Range: 35–95) with mean implantation period being 2.0 years (Range: 0.1–11.4) and mean body mass index of 29 kg/m 2 (Range: 22–46). Revision for infection (n=11), peri-prosthetic fracture (n=5) and dislocation (n=5) were the main reasons for revision. Mean corrosion damage scores were 2.0 and 3.6 (head, neck) while mean fretting damage scores were 8.5 and 5.8 (head, neck). Fretting damage score was weakly correlated with implantation period (p=0.07) while corrosion damage score was not. Mean corrosion and fretting volume measured 0.40 mm 3 and 0.87 mm 3 (head, neck). Volume of corrosion and fretting damage did not correlate with implantation period; however neck volume correlated with inclination angle of the acetabular cup (p The unique surface bumps were identified in 12 of 28 samples, with 3 samples having Conclusion Fretting damage was found to correlate with implantation period, suggesting that is a continuous in vivo process; however, this was not found for corrosion damage. Fretting damage volume correlated with acetabular cup angle; however, this may be coincidence as only 8 samples were included in the analysis. Overall, our corrosion damage scores (2.0–3.6) were lower than previously published values for 28mm & 36mm cobalt-chrome heads (4.5–13.1) [1]. However, our fretting damage scores (5.8–8.5) were higher than previously published (2.8–4.4) [1]. Greater fretting damage on the oxidized zirconium heads may be explained by the softer zirconium alloy compared to that of cobalt-chromium. Further subsurface investigation of the surface bumps is underway using a focused ion beam mill.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».