A study of periprosthetic fractures following hemi-arthroplasty of hip in elderly population: diagnosis and management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Hemi-arthroplasty of hip for intracapsular fractures of femoral neck is one of the most commonly done surgical procedures in the low mobility older Indian population. Although there are numerous complications associated with the procedure, we want to study the types and management of peri-prosthetic fractures in patients treated with hip hemi-arthroplasty.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> A total of 26 patients were included in the study. A retrospective analysis of the radiological cum clinical diagnosis and management of peri-prosthetic fractures was performed. All patients were followed up till 1.5 years post-operatively.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> According to Vancouver classification of peri-prosthetic fractures, 10 fractures were classified as type A, 7 as type B1, 3 as type B2, 4 as type B3 and 2 as type C. Fractures were managed either by Open Reduction with Internal Fixation (ORIF) or Revision hemi-arthroplasty. Fractures type AG, B1 and C were managed with ORIF and type B2 and B3 fractures were managed with revision hemi-arthroplasty using longer stem.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> As evident in our study, majority of fractures occurred intra-operatively, a thorough evaluation of pre-operative x-rays of both hips should be done along with special focus on anatomical variations. Correct diagnosis based on radiological and intraoperative findings followed by appropriate treatment are of paramount importance in the management of peri-prosthetic fractures.</p>
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".