MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032802939 · doi:10.4103/2006-8808.110260

Arthroscopic Bullet Removal from the Acetabulum (Hip Joint)

2012· article· en· W2032802939 on OpenAlexaff
Jamal Al‐Asiri, Ivan Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Surgical Technique and Case Report · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHip disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArthrotomyMedicineSurgeryHip arthroscopyAcetabulumGunshot woundArthroscopyForeign bodyAbdominal compartment syndromeAbdomen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hip arthroscopy has been shown to offer minimally invasive access to the hip joint compared with standard open arthrotomy. The use of arthroscopy for diagnosing and treating disorders about the hip continues to evolve. This study describes a case that involves arthroscopic removal of a bullet from a low-velocity gunshot wound. The patient sustained a gunshot wound that entered the abdomen and traversed the small bowel, sigmoid colon then penetrated the urinary bladder before ending up in the medial wall of the acetabulum. After surgical repair of the viscus, the bullet was retrieved from the hip joint using standard arthroscopic portals and a fracture table. A number of issues led to the decision to use arthroscopy. Most importantly was the need to minimize soft tissue dissection, which was required to access the bullet, without interfering with previous wound at the suprapubic area. The risks of potential bullet fragmentation and migration, as well as a possible abdominal compartment syndrome were considered before proceeding. Arthroscopy allowed adequate inspection of the articular surface, irrigation of the joint, and removal of the foreign body while avoiding an invasive arthrotomy with its associated morbidity and soft tissue disruption. This surgical technique afforded a very satisfactory outcome for this patient and serves as a model for others when encountering a similar injury pattern in a trauma patient. It is a procedure that can be performed safely, quickly, and with minimal complications for surgeons with experience in arthroscopy of the hip joint.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Surgical Technique and Case ReportSame topicHip disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207