Double plating in Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic proximal femur fractures: A biomechanical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Periprosthetic hip fractures are an increasing problem in modern orthopedic and trauma surgery. Many options for the operative treatment are available to the surgeon ranging from modern variable angular systems to standard plates, screws, and cerclages. However, there is no gold standard and therefore, the aim of this study, was to investigate the biomechanical characteristics of double plating versus a lateral standard plate in a Vancouver B1 fracture model. Ten 4th generation composite femora were used to implant cementless total hip prosthesis and create Vancouver B1 periprosthetic fractures. Afterwards, the osteotomies were fixed using the locking compression plate in combination with the locking attachment plate (LCP, LAP, DePuy Synthes, Solothurn, Switzerland)-group I. Group II additionally achieved a 5-hole 4.5/5.0 mm LCP anteriorly. Each construct was cyclically loaded to failure in axial compression. Axial construct stiffness was 50.87 N/mm (SD 1.61) for group I compared to 738.68 N/mm (SD 94.8) for group II, this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.016). The number of cycles to failure was also significant higher for group II (2,375 vs. 13,000 cycles; p = 0.016). Double plating can significantly increase construct stiffness and stability, and thus, is an option in the treatment of complex periprosthetic fractures, in revision surgery and for patients with the inability to partial weight bear. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 35:234-239, 2017.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".