Limb shortening as a strategy for limb sparing treatment of appendicular osteosarcoma of the distal radius in a dog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and report a novel limb sparing technique for the distal radius in a dog. STUDY DESIGN: Case report. ANIMAL: A 14-year-old, female spayed Labrador Retriever with an osteosarcoma of the right distal radius and a pathological fracture. A previous mast cell tumor had been treated 5 years prior to presentation with marginal excision and a full-course radiation over the right metacarpal bones. The dog had received 2 doses of palliative radiation just prior to presentation. METHODS: A standard resection of the distal radius was used as a strategy to salvage the limb. Instead of replacing the 6-cm bone defect with an endoprosthesis, the limb was acutely shortened and a carpal arthrodesis plate was applied. RESULTS: Postoperative function was good and limb shortening was well-tolerated. Radiographic evidence of early bone healing was noted at the osteotomy site. The dog experienced 3 postoperative complications: a focal area of skin necrosis managed successfully via surgical revision; infection resolving after long-term antibiotherapy; and a fracture of the third metacarpal bone through a screw hole, managed via screw removal and a custom external prosthesis. The patient was euthanatized due to presumptive chemotherapy complications 127 days after the procedure. CONCLUSION: Limb shortening limb salvage is technically feasible and can result in excellent limb use postoperatively, in spite of a significant loss in limb length.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".