Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures with unstable prosthesis by replacement of long-stem femoral prosthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To discuss the treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) with unstable prosthesis by replacement of long-stem femoral prosthesis and internal fixation. Methods From December 2005 to December 2014, 15 PFF patients with unstable prosthesis (15 hips) following were treated at our department. They were 10 men and 5 women, aged from 64 to 89 years (mean, 76.2 years) . Their primary surgeries included total hip arthroplasty in 13 cases and biological bi-polar replacement of femoral head in 2. Two prostheses were cement and 13 biological. By Vancouver classification, 9 cases were type B2, and 6 type B3. The unstable prostheses in the 15 cases were replaced by long-stem femoral ones, followed by internal fixation. At the last follow-ups, clinical outcome were evaluated by Harris scoring and images of PFF by Beals & Tower criteria. Complications were documented. Results One died 4 months after operation. The other 14 patients were followed up for an average of 4.5 years (from 6 months to 9 years) . Fracture union was achieved in 12 cases after an average of 3.9 months (from 3 to 9 months) . Nonunion occurred in 2 cases. Imaging evaluation revealed 9 excellent cases, 3 good ones and 2 poor ones. The Harris scores at the last follow-up averaged was 82.3 points (from 50 to 100 points) . Deep vein thrombosis occurred preoperatively in one case and posterior tibial vein thrombosis occurred in 2 cases respectively on day 3 and day 10 postoperatively. No such complications occurred as malunion, fixation failure, dislocation or prosthesis loosening. Conclusion Satisfactory outcomes can be achieved by replacement of long-stem femoral prosthesis combined with appropriate fixation for treatment of PFF with unstabrosthesis. Key words: Arthroplasty, replacement, hip; Femoral fractures; Postoperative complications; Prostheses and implants
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".