The Functional Outcome with Metallic Radial Head Implants in the Treatment of Unstable Elbow Fractures: A Long-Term Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A long-term review of metal prosthetic radial head replacement in patients with radial head fractures associated with gross instability of the elbow has been performed. METHOD: Twenty patients were reviewed using a modified Mayo Clinic functional rating index system. The mean follow-up was 12.1 years, with a range from 6 to 29 years. RESULTS: Results were excellent in 12 patients, good in 4 patients, fair in 2 patients, and poor in 2 patients. A metal radial head replacement restored elbow stability when fracture of the radial head occurred in combination with dislocation of the elbow, rupture of the medial collateral ligament, fracture of the proximal ulna, and/or fracture of the coronoid process. CONCLUSION: We conclude that a metal radial head prosthesis has select indications. We advocate its use when the radial head cannot be reconstructed in the setting of a clinically unstable elbow. Results suggest that it functions well on a long-term basis.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".