Modes of Wear After Semiconstrained Total Elbow Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteolysis and aseptic loosening are increasingly recognized complications of total elbow arthroplasty. However, unlike the literature on total hip and knee arthroplasty, studies describing the mechanisms of these processes after total elbow arthroplasty are sparse. METHODS: Semiconstrained total elbow arthroplasty components were retrieved from sixteen elbows (fourteen patients) at either revision surgery (at a mean of five years after implantation) for mechanical failure (fifteen elbows) or postmortem examination (one elbow). In all cases, the retrieved implant was the primary implant. The patterns of damage on these components were investigated with stereomicroscopy in correlation with clinical findings, serial radiographs, and histopathological observations. RESULTS: All of the retrieved devices exhibited multiple modes of wear. Damage to the humeral and ulnar polyethylene bushings was nearly universal; twenty-seven of twenty-eight humeral bushings demonstrated asymmetrical thinning, while fifteen of sixteen ulnar bushings demonstrated elliptical plastic deformation. In addition, unintended metal-on-metal wear between bearing and nonbearing surfaces or between two nonbearing surfaces was commonly observed, typically in association with wear and deformation of the polyethylene bushings. Wear between the stem and the cement mantle was observed in most of the ulnar components. The histopathology of the periprosthetic tissues was similar in character to that observed in association with osteolysis and loosening of total hip and knee replacements, while analysis of the particulate debris revealed a preponderance of titanium alloy and polyethylene debris. Barium sulfate particles were also observed to a lesser extent. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal wear in total elbow replacements can lead to osteolysis, aseptic loosening, and prosthetic and periprosthetic fracture necessitating revision surgery. Polyethylene wear and damage, as well as unintended metal-on-metal wear, contribute to the periprosthetic particulate burden, which is likely pathogenic in these processes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".