Neurologic Injury in Operatively Treated Acetabular Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to evaluate a series of operatively treated acetabular fractures with neurologic injury and to track sensory and motor recovery. METHODS: Operatively treated acetabular fractures with neurologic injury from 8 trauma centers were reviewed. Patients were followed for at least 6 months or to neurologic recovery. Functional outcome was documented at 3 months, 6 months, and final follow-up. Outcomes included motor and sensory recovery, brace use, development of chronic regional pain syndrome, and return to work. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-seven patients (101 males and 36 females), average age 42 (17-87) years, met the criteria. Mechanism of injury included MVC (67%), fall (11%), and other (22%). The most common fracture types were transverse + posterior wall (33%), posterior wall (23%), and both-column (23%). Deficits were identified as preoperative in 57%, iatrogenic in 19% (immediately after surgery), and those that developed postoperatively in 24%. A total of 187 nerve deficits associated with the following root levels were identified: 7 in L2-3, 18 in L4, 114 in L5, and 48 in S1. Full recovery occurred in 54 (29%), partial recovery in 69 (37%), and 64 (34%) had no recovery. Forty-three percent of S1 deficits and 29% of L5 deficits had no recovery. Fifty-five percent of iatrogenic injuries did not recover. Forty-eight patients wore a brace at the final follow-up, all for an L5 root level deficit. Although 60% (42/70) returned to work, chronic regional pain syndrome was seen to develop in 19% (18/94). CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral neurologic injury in operatively treated acetabular fractures occurs most commonly in the sciatic nerve distribution, with L5 root level deficits having only a 26% chance of full recovery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV. 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".