Periprosthetic Atypical Femoral Fractures in Patients on Long-term Bisphosphonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To define the characteristics of periprosthetic atypical femoral fractures (PAFFs) in patients on long-term bisphosphonate treatment and to provide a guide to the diagnosis and long-term treatment of these patients based on the literature. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective review. SETTING: Fifteen orthopaedic centers in the United States and Canada, including members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Patients on long-term bisphosphonates who presented with either periprosthetic fractures or femoral fractures, over a 10-year period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Time to union and complications. RESULTS: Clinically significant differences were identified in time to union, mortality, and complications. There was a statistically significant difference in complications. Imaging review demonstrated identical features in both atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) and PAFFs. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest comparative case series reported on PAFFS and AFFs and provides compelling evidence that PAFFs in patients on long-term bisphosphonates are indeed a subset of periprosthetic fractures that exhibit atypical femoral fracture (AFF) characteristics. As such, these fractures pose serious diagnostic and management challenges to trauma and arthroplasty surgeons. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".