091 CEMENT-IN-CEMENT STEM REVISION FOR VANCOUVER TYPE B PERIPROSTHETIC FEMORAL FRACTURES AFTER TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: 3 YEAR FOLLOW UP OF 24 CASES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Periprosthetic fractures around a cemented femoral stem present a challenge to the treating surgeon. We propose a technique whereby a well fixed cement mantle can be retained in cases with simple fractures that can be reduced anatomically. This technique is well established in femoral stem revision, but not in association with a fracture. 24 Vancouver type B periprosthetic femoral fractures were treated by reducing the fracture and cementing a revision stem into the pre-existing cement mantle, with or without supplementary fixation. 3 patients died in the first 6 months for reasons not related to surgery and one was too frail to attend follow up. The remaining 20 cases were followed up for a mean of 3.0 years. The median time to radiological and clinical union was 3.0 months (2–11). The median Modified Harris Hip Score was 76.9 (35–97) and there was no sign of loosening or subsidence of the revision stems within the old cement mantle in any case at most recent follow up. One patient had further surgery for a delayed union and there were 2 subsequent fractures distal to the original fracture site in patients with poor bone stock. Our results support the use of the cement-in-cement stem revision technique in anatomically reducible peri-prosthetic fractures with a well preserved pre-existing cement mantle. It is particularly suitable for older patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".