Cement as a locking mechanism for screw heads in acetabular revision shells a biomechanical analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In acetabular revisions, polyethylene (PE) liners are often cemented into metal shells on top of acetabular screw heads. This study investigates the possibility of using this technique to obtain fixed-angle acetabular screws Eth a concept that has not yet been reported in the literature. Two groups of screws (n=8) were inserted into Trabecular Metal revision shells (Zimmer), into which PE liners were then cemented. Screws in Group 1, inserted in the shell's pre-fabricated holes, were countersunk, whereas screws in Group 2 were inserted in custom-drilled holes that make their heads protrude into, and interdigitate with, the overlying cement mantle. Perpendicular loading was then applied to the screw shafts both statically to failure and cyclically. A greater stiffness was observed for the protruding screws upon static loading; and while the countersunk screws all failed at the screw-cement junction (53.44 + or - 8.33 N), the protruding screws all failed at the screw shaft (1049.79 + or - 32.12 N) a 20-fold difference (p< 0.05). Under cyclic loading, only the protruding screw head specimen did not fail, undergoing an overall displacement within the limits of osseointegration.These results support the hypothesis that the protrusion of an acetabular screw head into an overlying cement mantle significantly increases its angular stability. Provided other variables are favorable, this locking effect may increase the initial stability of the whole implant, thus improving the ultimate success of complex acetabular revisions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".