MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332297215 · doi:10.1097/bot.0b013e3181e47e3b

Femoral Malrotation after Unreamed Intramedullary Nailing: An Evaluation of Influencing Operative Factors

2011· article· en· W2332297215 on OpenAlexaff
T. Hüfner, Mustafa Çıtak, Eduardo M. Suero, Brian Miller, Daniel Kendoff, Christian Krettek, Musa Citak

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsObject Research Systems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntramedullary rodSurgeryRadiographyTrauma centerInternal fixationReduction (mathematics)Orthopedic surgeryRetrospective cohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine which clinical factors influence the presence and extent of femoral malrotation during unreamed nail insertion performed without a fracture table. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Academic trauma center. INTERVENTION: Patients were treated statically locked femoral nails inserted without reaming in either a retrograde or antegrade manner without the use of a fracture table between April 1, 2000, and December 31, 2005. All patients received postoperative computed tomography scans. Institutional radiographic threshold for revision surgery was 15° of either internal or external rotation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Postoperative computed tomography measurements of rotation were compared with the opposite side. Patients were grouped by 1) Orthopaedic Trauma Association fracture classification; 2) closed versus mini open reduction; 3) surgeon experience; 4) antegrade versus retrograde femoral nail; and 5) time of day surgery performed (day shift versus night shift). The following parameters were measured from the chart and x-ray: rotational malalignment, x-ray time, and duration of surgery. RESULTS: There were 82 femurs in 82 patients, 59 men and 23 women, with a mean age of 32 years (range, 17-83 years). Eighteen femurs (22%) showed a malrotation of greater than 15°. Seven were internally malrotated (mean, 23°; range 16°-32°), whereas 11 were externally malrotated (mean, 24.2°; range, 16°-39.7°). After clinical examination, only 11 of the 18 patients (61%) underwent revision surgery, six patients for external malrotation (mean, 27.47°; range, 21.9°-39.7°) and five for internal malrotation (mean, 23.6°; range, 16°-32°). Malrotation varied significantly with fracture severity with Type C averaging 19.4° (24 patients), Type B 9° (26 patients), and Type A 6.6° (32 patients). No difference was found between an open and closed technique nor the experience of surgeon or the type of implant. There was a significant difference depending on the time of surgery in which an average malrotation of 15.2° (14 patients) was found on the night shift and an average malrotation of 10.3° (68 patients) was found during the day. CONCLUSION: Rotational malalignment greater than 15° was found in 22% of femurs treated in this study. Fracture comminution and time of day the surgery was performed had the greatest effect on the severity of malrotation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic TraumaSame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207