Fractures of distally-fixed femoral stems after revision arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We identified five (2.3%) fractures of the stem in a series of 219 revision procedures using a cementless, cylindrical, extensively porous-coated, distally-fixed femoral stem. Factors relating to the patients, the implant and the operations were compared with those with intact stems. Finite-element analysis was performed on two of the fractured implants. Factors associated with fracture of the stem were poor proximal bone support (type III-type IV; p = 0.001), a body mass index > 30; (p = 0.014), a smaller diameter of stem (< 13.5 mm; p = 0.007) and the use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO 4/5: p = 0.028). Finite-element analysis showed that the highest stresses on the stem occurred adjacent to the site of the fracture. The use of a strut graft wired over an extended trochanteric osteotomy in patients lacking proximal femoral cortical support decreased the stresses on the stem by 48%.We recommend the use of a strut allograft in conjunction with an extended trochanteric osteotomy in patients with poor proximal femoral bone stock.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".