Polyethylene thickness is a risk factor for wear necessitating insert exchange
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this observational study was to investigate the optimal minimal polyethylene (PE) thickness in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and identify other risk factors associated with revision of the insert due to wear. METHODS: A total of 84 TKA were followed for 11-16 years. All patients received the same prosthesis design (Interax; Howmedica/ Stryker) with halfbearings: separate PE-inserts medially and laterally. Statistical analysis comprised Cox-regression to correct for confounding. RESULTS: Eight knees (9.5%) had been revised due to thinning inserts and an additional patient is scheduled for revision. PE thickness, diagnosis, BMI and weight are risk factors for insert exchange. For each millimetre decrease in PE thickness, the risk of insert exchange increases 3.0 times, which remains after correction for age, gender, weight, diagnosis and femoral-tibial angle. Insert exchange was 4.73 times more likely in OA-patients compared to RA-patients. For every unit increase in BMI and weight the risk for insert exchange increases 1.40 times and 1.14 times, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion we therefore advise against the use of thin PE inserts in modular TKA and recommend PE inserts with a minimal 8-mm thickness.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 it