Reemplazo de cadera en pacientes jóvenes: Experiencia con vástago corto preservador de cuello femoral
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The growing trend in the use of non-cemented implants and the development of technologies that attempt to restore the anatomy and joint function with greater bone preservation has increased the use of short stems in the total hip replacement (THR). The objective of this study is to describe functional results, radiological restoration of the anatomy, complication and revision rate of patients undergoing THR using short femoral stems with metaphyseal cervical fixation with lateral cortical support.Materials and Methods: A prospective descriptive study was performed that included 45 hips of patients with hip osteoarthritis of any origin. The follow-up was 18 months. The outcome variables evaluated were: 1. Integration of the implant, 2. Complications dependent on the femoral implant, 3. Subsidence, and 4. Re-intervention. The functional result was additionally evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC).Results: During the period from December 2011 to July 2017, an improvement was observed in functional status in 97% (n: 44) of patients, with no reoperations.Discussion: Bone integration of the implant was observed in 100% of the cases, making the results comparable with the reports in the literature. It is believed that the use of short stems in total hip replacement is a safe procedure, with good outcomes. It also has the advantage of an adequate bone integration of the implant, and guaranteeing a better bone stock in the next surgery.Evidence Level: IV.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".