III–2 LIPUS Treatment for Periprosthetic Fractures Following Bipolar Hip Arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Periprosthetic fractures following total and bipolar hip arthroplasty have increased in recent years. As such fractures often occur in the elderly, this causes difficulties for surgical treatment. We report successful treatment with LIPUS in 2 elderly patients with periprosthetic fracture following bipolar hip arthroplasty. Case 1: An 84-year-old female who could walk with a walker after treatment with bipolar hip arthroplasty. Six years after surgery, she fell and sustained a periprosthetic fracture (Vancouver B1). She was treated by open reduction and fixation with plate, cable (Synthes LCP), and band (Smith&Nephew CCG). A week after the second operation, LIPUS treatment began. Six weeks later, partial weight-bearing was permitted, and 8 weeks later full weight-bearing was permitted. Six months after the operation, bone union was completed, and she could again walk with a walker. Case 2: An 88-year-old female who could walk with a walker after treatment with bipolar hip arthroplasty. Six months after surgery, she fell and sustained a periprosthetic fracture (Vancouver B1). She was treated by open reduction and fixation with plate, cable (Synthes LCP), and band (Smith&Nephew CCG). A week after the second operation, LIPUS treatment started. Eight weeks later full weight-bearing was permitted. Ten months after the operation, bone union was completed, and she could again walk with a walker. Discussion: Bone union was obtained with LIPUS, and the patients could maintain their activities of daily living.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".