Intraprosthetic fixation techniques in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures-A biomechanical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To develop new fixation techniques for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures using intraprosthetic screw fixation with inserted threaded liners. METHODS: A Vancouver B1 periprosthetic fracture was simulated in femur prosthesis constructs using sawbones and cemented regular straight hip stems. Fixation was then performed with either unicortical locked-screw plating using the less invasive stabilization system-plate or with intraprosthetic screw fixation using inserted liners. Two experimental groups were formed using either prostheses made of titanium alloy or prostheses made of cobalt chrome alloy. Fixation stability was compared in an axial load-to-failure model. Drilling was performed using a specially invented prosthesis drill with constantly applied internal cooling. RESULTS: The intraprosthetic fixation model with titanium prostheses was superior to the unicortical locked-screw fixation in all tested devices. The intraprosthetic fixation model required 10 456 N ± 1892 N for failure and the unicortical locked-screw plating required 7649 N ± 653 N (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the second experimental group and the control group. CONCLUSION: Intraprosthetic screw anchorage with special threaded liners enhances the primary stability in treating periprosthetic fractures by internal fixation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".