Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes with a Hydroxyapatite and Porous Coated Cup Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Press-fit, hydroxyapatite-coated acetabular cup designs may offer a lower incidence of loosening and migration than older designs. Our study evaluated the initial clinical and radiographic success of a cementless acetabular shell in a large cohort of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients. We queried our institution’s prospectively collected registry for a series of 771 primary THAs (695 patients) implanted with this cup by 4 high-volume arthroplasty surgeons. Of the 613 hips with minimum 2-year followup, average HHS (Harris Hip Score) was 93.6, WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) was 87.6, and VAS (Visual Analog Scale) pain score was 1.2. While there was a 2% reoperation rate (12 hips), none of the cups were revised for aseptic loosening. No radiolucencies were found and there was no evidence of acetabular loosening. At early followup, this newer cementless acetabular cup implant design exhibits high survivorship and clinical success.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".