Review of complications, functional outcome, and long-term survival following conversion of hip fusion to total hip arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Improvements in functional results and long-term survival are variable following conversion of hip fusion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) and complications are high. The aim of the study was to analyze the clinical and functional results in patients who underwent conversion of hip fusion to THA using a consistent technique and uncemented implants. METHODS: A total of 39 hip fusion conversions to THA were undertaken in 38 patients by a single surgeon employing a consistent surgical technique and uncemented implants. Parameters assessed included Harris Hip Score (HHS) for function, range of motion (ROM), leg length discrepancy (LLD), satisfaction, and use of walking aid. Radiographs were reviewed for loosening, subsidence, and heterotopic ossification (HO). Postoperative complications and implant survival were assessed. RESULTS: At mean 12.2 years (2 to 24) follow-up, HHS improved from mean 34.2 (20.8 to 60.5) to 75 (53.6 to 94.0; p < 0.001). Mean postoperative ROM was flexion 77° (50° to 95°), abduction 30° (10° to 40°), adduction 20° (5° to 25°), internal rotation 18° (2° to 30°), and external rotation 17° (5° to 30°). LLD improved from mean -3.36 cm (0 to 8) to postoperative mean -1.14 cm (0 to 4; p < 0.001). Postoperatively, 26 patients (68.4%) required the use of a walking aid. Complications included one (2.5%) dislocation, two (5.1%) partial sciatic nerve injuries, one (2.5%) deep periprosthetic joint infection, two instances of (5.1%) acetabular component aseptic loosening, two (5.1%) periprosthetic fractures, and ten instances of HO (40%), of which three (7.7%) were functionally limiting and required excision. Kaplan-Meier Survival was 97.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91.4% to 100%) at ten years and 88.2% (95% CI 70.96 to 100) at 15 years with implant revision for aseptic loosening as endpoint and 81.7% (95% CI 70.9% to 98.0%) at ten years and 74.2% (95% CI 55.6 to 92.8) at 15 years follow-up with implant revision for all cause failure as endpoint. CONCLUSION: 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):129-134.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".