Revision total hip arthroplasty in patients with extensive proximal femoral bone loss using a fluted tapered modular femoral component
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is challenging when there is severe loss of bone in the proximal femur. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of revision THA in patients with severe proximal femoral bone loss treated with a fluted, tapered, modular femoral component. Between January 1998 and December 2004, 92 revision THAs were performed in 92 patients using a single fluted, tapered, modular femoral stem design. Pre-operative diagnoses included aseptic loosening, infection and peri-prosthetic fracture. Bone loss was categorised pre-operatively as Paprosky types III-IV, or Vancouver B3 in patients with a peri-prosthetic fracture. The mean clinical follow-up was 6.4 years (2 to 12). A total of 47 patients had peri-operative complications, 27 of whom required further surgery. However, most of these further operations involved retention of a well-fixed femoral stem, and 88/92 femoral components (97%) remained in situ. Of the four components requiring revision, three were revised for infection and were well fixed at the time of revision; only one (1%) was revised for aseptic loosening. The most common complications were post-operative instability (17 hips, 19%) and intra-operative femoral fracture during insertion of the stem (11 hips, 12%). Diaphyseal stress shielding was noted in 20 hips (22%). There were no fractures of the femoral component. At the final follow-up 78% of patients had minimal or no pain. Revision THA in patients with extensive proximal femoral bone loss using the Link MP fluted, tapered, modular stem led to a high rate of osseointegration of the stem at mid-term follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:312-17.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".