Can a semi-automated surface matching and principal axis-based algorithm accurately quantify femoral shaft fracture alignment in six degrees of freedom?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate alignment of femoral shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nailing remains a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. The aim of this study is to develop and validate a cone-beam CT-based, semi-automated algorithm to quantify the malalignment in six degrees of freedom (6DOF) using a surface matching and principal axes-based approach. Complex comminuted diaphyseal fractures were created in nine cadaveric femora and cone-beam CT images were acquired (27 cases total). Scans were cropped and segmented using intensity-based thresholding, producing superior, inferior and comminution volumes. Cylinders were fit to estimate the long axes of the superior and inferior fragments. The angle and distance between the two cylindrical axes were calculated to determine flexion/extension and varus/valgus angulation and medial/lateral and anterior/posterior translations, respectively. Both surfaces were unwrapped about the cylindrical axes. Three methods of matching the unwrapped surface for determination of periaxial rotation were compared based on minimizing the distance between features. The calculated corrections were compared to the input malalignment conditions. All 6DOF were calculated to within current clinical tolerances for all but two cases. This algorithm yielded accurate quantification of malalignment of femoral shaft fractures for fracture gaps up to 60 mm, based on a single CBCT image of the fractured limb.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".