The Durom Large Diameter Head acetabular component
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Implantation of a large-diameter femoral head prosthesis with a metal-on-metal bearing surface reduces the risk of dislocation, increases the range of movement, minimises the risk of impingement and, in theory, results in little wear. Between February 2004 and March 2007 we implanted 100 consecutive total hip replacements with a metal-on-metal bearing and a large femoral head into 92 patients. There were 51 men and 41 women with a mean age of 50 years (18 to 70) at the time of surgery. Outcome was assessed using the Western Ontario McMaster University osteoarthritis index and the Harris hip score as well as the Devane activity score. These all improved significantly (p < 0.0001). At the last follow-up there were no cases of dislocation, no impingement, a good range of movement and no osteolysis, but seven revisions, two for infection and five for aseptic loosening. The probability of groin pain increased if the other acetabular component inclination exceeded 50 degrees (p = 0.0007). At 4.8 years of follow-up, the projected survival of the Durom acetabular component, with revision for any reason, was 92.4% (sd 2.8) (95% confidence interval 89.6 to 95.2). The design of the component made it difficult both to orientate and seat, which when combined with a poor porous coating, produced unpredictable fixation and a low survival at five years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".