Highly crosslinked polyethylene wear rates and acetabular component orientation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aims: The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in the rate of wear between acetabular components positioned within and outside the 'safe zones' of anteversion and inclination angle. Patients and Methods: We reviewed 100 hips in 94 patients who had undergone primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) at least ten years previously. Patients all had the same type of acetabular component with a bearing couple which consisted of a 28 mm cobalt-chromium head on a highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) liner. A supine radiostereometric analysis (RSA) examination was carried out which acquired anteroposterior (AP) and lateral paired images. Acetabular component anteversion and inclination angles were measured as well as total femoral head penetration, which was divided by the length of implantation to determine the rate of polyethylene wear. Results: The mean anteversion angle was 19.4° (-15.2° to 48°, sd 11.4°), the mean inclination angle 43.4° (27.3° to 60.5°, sd 6.6°), and the mean wear rate 0.055 mm/year (sd 0.060). Exactly half of the hips were positioned inside the 'safe zone'. There was no difference (median difference, 0.012 mm/year; p = 0.091) in the rate of wear between acetabular components located within or outside the 'safe zone'. When compared to acetabular components located inside the 'safe zone', the wear rate was no different for acetabular components that only achieved the target anteversion angle (median difference, 0.012 mm/year; p = 0.138), target inclination angle (median difference, 0.013 mm/year; p = 0.354), or neither target (median difference, 0.012 mm/year; p = 0.322). Conclusion: Placing the acetabular component within or outside the 'safe zone' did not alter the wear rate of HXLPE at long-term follow-up to a level that risked osteolysis. HXLPE appears to be a forgiving bearing material in terms of articular surface wear, but care must still be taken to position the acetabular component correctly so that the implant is stable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:891-7.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".