Adverse Local Tissue Reaction Associated With a Modular Hip Hemiarthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The local and systemic effects of wear debris and corrosion products remain a concern in arthroplasty and reaction to corrosion or wear products from modular junctions has been reported in primary and revision total joint arthroplasties. These effects have not been reported previously for unipolar hemiarthroplasties where there is no prosthetic bearing surface to contribute to the phenomenon. This may have implications for clinical surveillance and implant design. CASE DESCRIPTION: We report the case of a 72-year-old man who had symptomatic pseudotumor formation, confirmed by pathologic examination of the excised pseudotumor, with a large-head modular hip hemiarthroplasty. Metallosis and corrosion of the modular head/neck taper junction were noted at the time of revision surgery. LITERATURE REVIEW: To our knowledge, this is the first report of pseudotumor formation where the corrosion or wear products arose from the modular junction of the implant with no bearing couple present to contribute wear debris that may influence the formation of the pseudotumor. PURPOSES AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Adverse tissue reactions to wear debris generated at prosthetic articulating surfaces and corrosion and wear products from nonarticulating prosthetic junctions have been reported. The problem has been reported to be higher in metal-on-metal bearing couples and in large-diameter hip arthroplasties. Mixed-alloy junctions appear to be more susceptible to corrosion. We believe that corrosion should be considered a possible diagnostic entity when investigating persistent symptoms after hemiarthroplasty and may be avoided with the use of monoblock components.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".