Acetabular Options: Notes From the Other Side
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The socket remains the weakest link of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). The revision rates of the socket are higher than those of the stem, with aseptic loosening and polyethylene wear being the most frequent indications for revision THA. Both cemented all-polyethylene cups and cementless sockets have benefited from stepwise improvements in surgical techniques and designs. In many countries, cementless sockets have replaced cemented cups during primary THA, with >90% of the acetabular components using a cementless fixation mode. The long-term prospective data of cementless sockets from high-volume centers show excellent and equivalent survivorship to cemented implants, but the insertion technique is easier and quicker. In addition, cementless sockets are more versatile than cemented all-polyethylene cups. With cementless sockets there is a move to increased porosity of the ingrowth surface, tri-bearing options, and enhanced locking mechanisms. There is a role for well-conducted randomized controlled trials to assess these new designs because data from various national registries show that the socket remains the weakest link of primary THA. Factors like sex, age, diagnosis, and bearing couples have a different and significant influence on the intermediate to long-term survivorship of contemporary cemented and cementless THA.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.011 |
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".