Radiostereometric analysis of keeled versus pegged glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized feasibility study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess differences in the fixation and functional outcomes between pegged and keeled all-polyethylene glenoid components for standard total shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive a keeled or pegged all-polyethylene glenoid component. We used model-based radiostereometric analysis (RSA) to assess glenoid fixation and subjective outcome measures to assess patient function. Follow-up examinations were completed at 6 weeks and 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. Modifications to the RSA surgical, imaging and analytical techniques were required throughout the study to improve the viability of the data. RESULTS: Stymied enrolment resulted in only 16 patients being included in our analyses. The RSA data indicated statistically greater coronal plane migration in the keeled glenoid group than in the pegged group at 12 and 24 months. Functional outcome scores did not differ significantly between the groups at any follow-up. One patient with a keeled glenoid showed high component migration after 24 months and subsequently required revision surgery 7 years postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Despite a small sample size, we found significant differences in migration between glenoid device designs. Although clinically these findings are not robust, we have shown the feasibility of RSA in total shoulder arthroplasty as well as the value of a high-precision metric to achieve objective results in a small group of 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".