Accuracy and precision of a CT method for assessing migration in shoulder arthroplasty: an experimental study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is the gold standard to measure early implant migration which is a predictive factor for implant survival. PURPOSE: To validate an alternative computed tomography (CT) technique to measure implant migration in shoulder arthroplasty. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A cadaver proximal humerus and a scapula, which had tantalum beads incorporated within them, were prepared to accept a short-stemmed humeral component and a two-pegged glenoid component of a commercial total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) system. A five degree of freedom micrometer and goniometer equipped rig was used to translate and rotate the implant components relative to the respective bone to predetermined positions. Double CT examinations were performed for each position and CT motion analysis software (CTMA) was used to assess these movements. The accuracy and precision of the software was estimated using the rig's micrometers and goniometers as the gold standard. The technique's effective dose was also assessed. RESULTS: The accuracy was in the range of 0.07-0.23 mm in translation and 0.22-0.71° in rotation. The precision was in the range of 0.08-0.15 mm in translation and 0.23-0.54° in rotation. The mean effective dose for the CT scans was calculated to be 0.27 mSv. CONCLUSION: In this experimental setting, accuracy, precision, and effective dose of the CTMA technique were found to be comparable to that of RSA. Therefore, we believe clinical studies are warranted to determine if CTMA is a suitable alternative to traditional RSA for migration measurements in TSA.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".