Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty for Legg-Calvé-Perthes Syndrome: 20 Year Follow-Up Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients with Legg-Calvé-Perthes Syndrome (LCPS) are at an increased risk for developing osteoarthritis of the hip and undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) at an early age. Importantly, this younger age may put them at a higher risk for failure and revision surgery. The purpose of the study was to assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes as well as implant failure rate and risk for revision surgery at an average 20 years follow up. Methods: Data from LCPS patients treated with THA were collected including age, gender, operative date, revision date, as well as reason for and type of revision. Living patients filled the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaires at the time of last follow-up. Radiographs were evaluated for lucencies, debonding, loosening, osteolysis, wear, heterotopic ossification and sclerosis. Results: Nineteen patients (20 hips) treated with THA were followed-up for a mean of 18.3 years (range, 10.1 - 36.2 years). Radiographic evidence of lucency of the acetabular component was seen in 70% of the patients and femoral cortical hypertrophy in 85% at last follow-up. The rate of revision for any reason was 35%, mostly due to aseptic acetabular loosening. Conclusions: Our findings support the use of THA for the treatment of OA in patients with LCPS, bearing in mind the potentially lower survival rate at 20 years as compared those treated with THA for primary OA. Further studies are needed to identify the possible causes of the high rate of cortical hypertrophy seen in this patient population.Level of Evidence: IV Therapeutic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".