MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514249596

A microarchitectured material for a mechanically biocompatible hip implant

2013· article· en· W2514249596 on OpenAlexaff
Damiano Pasini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Tissue Science & Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress shieldingImplantBiocompatibilityMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringResorptionBone resorptionBone tissueDentistryMedicineSurgeryPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

B resorption is ubiquitous in reconstructive orthopaedics. The process generally occurs when the mechanical properties of the implant do not match those of the surrounding bone tissue that hosts it. Lack of mechanical biocompatibility is universally recognized to be a major detriment of existing hip replacement implants. Among those in the market, cementless or porous-coated prostheses, there is not a single implant that can avoid bone resorption. The problem triggered by implant loosening and stress shieldingis critical for both primary and revision hip surgery. We have recently introduced a hipreplacement implant that prevents stress-shielding, as well as reduces implant micromotion, two conflicting requirements. The hallmark of the implant lies in the material microarchitecture: an open cell Ti-6AL-4V microlattice with functionally graded structure. Its properties are locally tailored to match the strain energy density of bone tissue. Compared to existing implants, bone resorption and maximum interface stress are about 70% and 50% less than those of a fully dense titanium stem, and 53% and 65% less than those of a porous-coated implant. Stem prototypes with Ti-6Al4V isoelasticmicrolattices have been successfully built with Electron Beam Melting. In this talk, I will describe the biomechanics and optimization of the material microarchitecture, the multiscale behavior of the femoral stem, as well as the technology aspects. The results show that tuning the mechanical biocompatibility of the lattice enables the surrounding bone tissue to remodel in the long term, thereby keeping femur bone stock. Damiano Pasini, J Tissue Sci Eng 2013, 4:2 http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2157-7552.S1.010

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Tissue Science & EngineeringSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207