ENDOPROSTHETIC RECONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING PERIACETABULAR TUMOUR RESECTION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We performed a retrospective review of 98 patients with malignant tumours of the periacetabular region, treated by resection and endoprosthetic reconstruction between 1971 and 2005 at the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore and The Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham. The mean age of the patients was 43.6 years (10 to 76). 53 patients (54%) were male. The age distribution demonstrated peaks in the 2nd and 6th decades. The mean follow up was 65 months (2 to 405. The overall 10-year survival rate was 56% (determined by the Kaplan-Meier method). 54 patients (58.1%) had one or more complications. Infection was the most common (30%) with the majority occurring in the first 2 years. Dislocation occurred in 19 (20%) of our patients all in the first year following surgery. All were recurrent with a mean of 2.9 (2 to 6) episodes. Operations performed before 1994 were associated with a dislocation rate of 40.5% and after 1996 the rate was only 3.9% (p Function was assessed according the Toronto Extremity Salvage Sore (TESS). The overall TESS was 59.4. In patients that had a major complication the TESS was 37.1 but in the group that did not the TESS was 70.3 (p Men experienced higher rates of death, infection and revision than women (p This method of reconstruction is still associated with high complication rates. Function is good if a major complication can be avoided. The lower dislocation rate more recently is probably the result of improved surgical technique and the use of larger femoral heads.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".