Unstable Vancouver B1 Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture Fixation: A Biomechanical Comparison Between Cerclage Wiring and C-Shaped Shape Memory Alloy Implant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although cerclage wiring is a very useful implant, it has many problems. We manufactured an alphabet C-shaped clip with nitinol (C-clip) that has superelastic property to replace the cerclage wiring.This study aimed to compare the biomechanical stability of cerclage cable and the C-clip. Eighteen synthetic femora were tested. An unstable VB1 fractures model was constructed that oblique fracture line was 8cm below the lesser trochanter with fracture gab. The distal fixation was repaired with a locking plate and four bi-cortical screws. The proximal fixation was repaired two different methods: (1) four-threaded cerclage cables and (2) four new C-clip. In axial compression test, the C-clip was stiffer than the cerclage cable (median stiffness of C-clip = 39.28 N/mm [IQR; 38.84-41.19], cerclage cable = 34.90 N/mm [34.84-35.08], p<0.05). In the torsion test, the C-clip was 0.44 Nm/° [IQR; 0.44-0.45] and cerclage cable = 0.30 Nm/° [0.30-0.33], p<0.05). In the four-point bending test, the C-clip = 39.35 N/mm [IQR; 38.91-40.97] and cerclage cable = 28.38 N/mm, [28.33-30.79], p<0.05) The C-clip may be biomechanically superior to cerclage wiring in terms of stiffness, axial compression, torsion, and four-point bending tests and is a valuable alternative in Vancouver type B1 periprosthetic femoral fracture.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".