Fixation of pathological humeral fractures by the cemented plate technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pathological fractures of the humerus are associated with pain, morbidity, loss of function and a diminished quality of life. We report our experience of stabilising these fractures using polymethylmethacrylate and non-locking plates. We undertook a retrospective review over 20 years of patients treated at a tertiary musculoskeletal oncology centre. Those who had undergone surgery for an impending or completed pathological humeral fracture with a diagnosis of metastatic disease or myeloma were identified from our database. There were 63 patients (43 men, 20 women) in the series with a mean age of 63 years (39 to 87). All had undergone intralesional curettage of the tumour followed by fixation with intramedullary polymethylmethacrylate and plating. Complications occurred in 14 patients (22.2%) and seven (11.1%) required re-operation. At the latest follow-up, 47 patients (74.6%) were deceased and 16 (25.4%) were living with a mean follow-up of 75 months (1 to 184). A total of 54 (86%) patients had no or mild pain and 50 (80%) required no or minimal assistance with activities of daily living. Of the 16 living patients none had pain and all could perform activities of daily living without assistance. Intralesional resection of the tumour, filling of the cavity with cement, and plate stabilisation of the pathological fracture gives immediate rigidity and allows an early return of function without the need for bony union. The patient's local disease burden is reduced, which may alleviate tumour-related pain and slow the progression of the disease. The cemented-plate technique provides a reliable option for the treatment of pathological fractures of the humerus.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".