Structural proximal femoral allografts for failed total hip replacements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are few medium- and long-term data on the outcome of the use of proximal femoral structural allografts in revision hip arthroplasty. This is a study of a consecutive series of 40 proximal femoral allografts performed for failed total hip replacements using the same technique with a minimum follow-up of five years (mean 8.8 years; range 5 to 11.5 years). In all cases the stem was cemented into both the allograft and the host femur. The proximal femur of the host was resected in 37 cases. There were four early revisions (10%), two for infection, one for nonunion of the allograft-host junction, and one for allograft resorption noted at the time of revision of a failed acetabular reconstruction. Junctional nonunion was seen in three patients (8%), two of whom were managed successfully by bone grafting, and bone grafting and plating respectively. Instability was observed in four (10%). Trochanteric nonunion was seen in 18 patients (46%) and trochanteric escape in ten of these (27%). The mean Harris hip score improved from 39 to 79. Severe resorption involving the full thickness of the allograft was seen in seven patients (17.5%). This progressed rapidly and silently, but has yet to cause failure of any of the reconstructions. Profound resorption of the allograft may be related to a combination of factors, including a slow form of immune rejection, stress shielding and resorption due to mechanical disuse with solid cemented distal fixation, and the absence of any masking or protective effect which may be provided by the retention of the bivalved host bone as a vascularised onlay autograft. Although continued surveillance is warranted, the very good medium-term clinical results justify the continued use of structural allografts for failed total hip replacements with severe loss of proximal femoral bone.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".