Primärstabilität von zementfrei implantierten Hüftprothesenschäften aus Titan mit metaphysärer Verankerung
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Under early mobilisation and full weightbearing the primary stability of two different cementless hip stems should be examined by using Roentgen Stereometric Analysis (RSA). METHOD: 26 patients (slashed circle 60.8+/-7.5 J., 16 m, 10 w, BMI 27.7+/-3.9 kg/m2) received a total hip arthroplasty with an anatomical designed image-stem (IS) (Smith & Nephew, Schenefeld, Germany), 20 patients (slashed circle 60.0+/-10.9 J., 12 m, 8 w, BMI 27.5+/-3 .7 kg/m2) the Bicontact-stem (BS) (Aesculap, Tuttllingen, Germany). RSA measurements were done before mobilizing, 3 and 6 weeks, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Furthermore the patients had to estimate their pain on a visually scale (VAS). We registrated the Harris-Hip-Score (HHS) and the Western Ontario and McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). RESULTS: Both stems showed the maximum of subsidence in the first 3 months (IS 0.647 mm, BS 0.54 mm). 6 months postoperative the measured migrations were in the range of the accuracy. After 2 years the subsidence was 1.07 mm+/-0.07 mm for the IS-group, 0.97 mm+/-0.18 mm for the BS-group. There were no significant differences in the examined parameters between the both groups. An excellent prostheses function and high activity grade with a high WOMAC score, a high HHS and a low VAS was founded for both groups. CONCLUSION: Both cementless implanted titanium hip stems showed a sufficient primary and midterm stability with excellent clinical results. The measured migrations do not differ from those given in literature for cemented stems.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".