Hip Revision Arthroplasty in Periprosthetic Fractures of Vancouver Type B2 and B3
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the study was to test the hypothesis that stem revision in Vancouver Type B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures using a transfemoral surgical approach and a modular, noncemented, tapered and fluted revision stem led to reproducibly good results with respect to fracture healing, stability of the prosthesis stem, dislocation, intraoperative fracture, and clinical outcome. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Orthopaedic specialized clinic and center for joint replacement. PATIENTS: Twenty-two patients with periprosthetic fractures of Vancouver Type B2 and 10 of Type B3 were followed of at least 24 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Fracture healing, stability of the prosthesis stem, complications, and clinical outcome. RESULTS: All fractures healed with a mean time of 14.5 ± 5.2 weeks. No cases of subsidence of the stem were observed and, according to the classification of Engh et al concerning the biologic fixation of the stem, there was bony ingrowth fixation in 28 cases and stable fibrous fixation in four cases. One dislocation occurred and there were no cases of intraoperative fracture. The Harris hip score rose continually after the operations; from a score 3-months postoperatively of 59.2 ± 14.6 points, it rose to 81.6 ± 16.5 points after 24 months. According to the classification of Beals and Tower, all results were rated as excellent. CONCLUSIONS: The methods described here for stem revision lead to reproducibly good results in the treatment of periprosthetic hip fractures of Vancouver Types B2 and B3. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".