LOCKING PLATE SYSTEM IN THE TREATMENT OF PERIPROTHETIC FRACTURE FOLLOWING INTRAMEDULLARY NAIL TREATMENT FOR FEMORAL INTERTROCHANTERIC FRACTURE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To discuss the feasibility of using the locking plate system(LPS)in the treatment of fracture around the intramedullary nail after treatment of femoral intertrochanteric fracture(FITF). Methods By applying LPS,seven patients with fracture around the intramedullary nail after surgry for FITF(fracture around the prosthesis after surgery of prosthetic replacement of joint,Vancouver type-B1fracture)were divided into two groups:removal intramedullary nail group and retention group.A postoperative follow up was conducted for more than 12 months to observe the fracture healing and the recovery of limb function. Results The fractures in the seven patients healed well and returned to walk. Conclusion It is a wise choice to use locking plate system for subsequent peri-prothetic fracture(Vancouver type-B1)following intramedullary treatment for intertrochanteric fracture,especially for those with previously incompletely-healed fracture.The initial main nail had to be reserved.The fracture of intramedullary side can be fixed by unicortical and/or bicortical screws.The titanium cables around the stem can be used to strengthen the fixation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".