Use of a Calcium Sulfate–Calcium Phosphate Synthetic Bone Graft Composite in the Surgical Management of Primary Bone Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Benign primary bone tumors are commonly treated with intralesional curettage with or without the use of surgical adjuvants. The reconstructive approach to the resulting contained bone defects is controversial, and clinical practice is varied. Synthetic bone substitutes may provide early mechanical support while minimizing the risks of disease transmission, nonunion, infection, and donor-site morbidity. Limited data exists regarding the use of calcium sulfate-calcium phosphate composite bone substitute for this purpose. The authors retrospectively reviewed the clinical outcomes of 24 patients with benign primary bone tumors who underwent intralesional curettage followed by reconstruction with a calcium sulfate-calcium phosphate composite bone substitute. Mean follow-up was 23 months. The most common diagnosis was giant cell tumor of bone. Six patients had upper-extremity tumors and 18 had lower-extremity tumors. Mean preoperative radiographic tumor volume was 41.0 cm(3). Mean volume of PRO-DENSE (Wright Medical Technology, Arlington, Tennessee) used in each patient was 15.6 cm(3). Mean time to full weight bearing for all patients was 7.3 weeks. Two patients sustained local tumor recurrences. No postoperative fractures occurred, and no complications occurred related to the use of the calcium sulfate-calcium phosphate composite. One case of deep infection occurred secondary to wound breakdown. The use of a calcium sulfate-calcium phosphate composite was associated with rapid biological integration and an early return to activities of daily living, with no composite-related complications. This technique is a viable option in the reconstruction of cavitary bone defects following intralesional curettage of primary benign bone tumors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".