MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2465501200

MANAGEMENT OF PROXIMAL FEMORAL DEFICIENCY IN REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY WITH A DISTAL FIXATION STEM

2006· article· en· W2465501200 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
HK Shanker, A. J. R. Gray, P. Grigoris

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeriprostheticMedicineSurgeryImplantFixation (population genetics)ProsthesisArthroplastyOsseointegrationFemur
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Femoral revision total hip arthroplasty is a technically demanding procedure, especially when there is extensive proximal femoral bone loss. Secure fixation maynot be possible to achieve if the implant relies solely on proximal metaphyseal fit. The use of a long tapered cementless stem having a microporous surface offers a strong anchorage distal to the damaged bony segment. By bypassing the compramised proximal femur, initial implant stability is achieved and a high rate of osseointegration can be expected. We present our experience with Link MP reconstruction stem which utilises distal fixation and has a modular proximal end.. The prosthesis is made of Tilastan( Ti6AI4V Eli Titanium Alloy) with microporous texture of about 70 microns pore diameter. The distally tapered stem is angled about 3 degrees proximally to enable easy insertion of the stem. In our series there were 53 stem revisions done in 51 patients. Twenty three were males and 28 were female patients. The average age of the male patient was 66 years and that of the female was 74 years. The mean followup was 37 months( range 12–76 months.) Indications for revision were aseptic loosening in 35 cases, infected hip replacements in 8 patients and periprosthetic fracture in ten cases. Revision for infected primary arthroplasty was done in two stages with the Link MP stem inserted at the second stage. All the proximal femoral defects were classified radiographically as described by Gustillo and Pasternak. There were 29 type 2 defects and 14 type 3 defects. The periprosthetic fractures were classified as per the Vancouver system and all the cases were type b fractures. Clinical scoring as described by d’Aubigne and Postel was used . The mean preoperative score was 3.5 while average score at the time of follow-up was 9.8. The subsidence ranged from none to 6mm. Good radiological evidence of proximal femoral restoration was seen in 44% of the cases in our series. Complications included greater trochanter fracture in 4 cases, perforation of the anterior cortex during reaming using the rasp in 2 cases and dislocation in one patient. In one case there was unacceptable penetration of the implant medially and this was subsequently treated by re-revision with a Huckstep stem. There were two intraoperative fractures which were treated with circlage wire fixation and they went on to union. None of the patients required a re-revision till date. In conclusion , our experience with Link MP reconstruction stem has been encouraging as shown by the improved d’Aubigne & Postel scores and low rate of complications. We also observed proximal femoral restoration and high implant survivorship in our series.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty→French-language works237,207→