The pressure generated during the insertion of an intramedullary device: experiments and numerical modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the orthopaedic procedures of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA), it is often necessary to hammer an intramedullary device into the femur.This action is thought to create high pressures in the intramedullary canal, and may result in the release of fat emboli into the cardiovascular system.This work presents measured intramedullary pressures generated during hammering of an intramedullary device into a simulated femur geometry consisting of a tube of porous open-cell plastic with the same porosity and pore size as femoral cortical bone.The experimental results were found to be, on average, approximately 20% lower than those predicted by a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model of the insertion process.Based on this, we conclude that it is reasonable to use CFD models to predict intramedullary pressures resulting from orthopaedic procedures that breach the intramedullary canal.As far as the authors know, this is the first attempt to use CFD modeling to study a problem of this type.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".