Proximal Femoral Replacement for the Treatment of Periprosthetic Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A periprosthetic fracture around the femoral component is a rare but potentially problematic complication after total hip arthroplasty. Reconstruction can be challenging, especially when severe bone stock deficiency is encountered. Proximal femoral replacement is one method of treating the severely deficient proximal part of the femur. The present report describes the outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a proximal femoral replacement in a cohort of patients who had a Vancouver type-B3 periprosthetic fracture. METHODS: With use of a computerized institutional database, all patients in whom a Vancouver type-B3 fracture (characterized by severe proximal bone deficiency and a loose femoral stem) had been treated with a proximal femoral replacement were identified. A modular femoral replacement with proximal porous coating had been used in all cases. The twenty-one patients who were identified had had a mean age of 78.3 years (range, fifty-two to ninety years) at the time of the index operation. The clinical and radiographic records of these patients were reviewed. RESULTS: At the time of the latest follow-up (mean, 3.2 years), all but one of the patients were able to walk and had minimal to no pain. Complications included persistent wound drainage that was treated with incision and drainage (two hips), dislocation (two hips), refracture of the femur distal to the stem (one hip), and acetabular cage failure (one hip). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a relatively high complication rate, we believe that proximal femoral replacement is a viable option for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures in older patients with severe bone deficiency. If a proximal femoral replacement is used, the stability of the hip must be tested diligently intraoperatively and a constrained acetabular liner should be utilized if instability is encountered. In order to enhance the bone stock, the proximal part of the femur, however poor in quality, should be retained for reapproximation onto the implant.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
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".