Knee mega-prosthesis in the management of complex knee fracture of the elderly : a case series and review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The management of complicated distal femur fractures (DFF) of the elderly continues to pose a challenge. Knee mega-prosthesis are mostly used for Total knee arthroplasty revision and tumor resection surgery but they can be used for the treatment of complex knee fractures. The purpose of the present study is to examine the short- to mid- term outcomes of their use for complex DFF of the elderly. We retrospectively identified 4 patients with DFF AO33C3 on osteoporotic bone treated by total knee arthroplasty from September 2015 to October 2019. The average age at the time of the surgery was 79,5 years (range, 69 to 95 years). All patients were females and underwent a total knee replacement by one senior surgeon, with the OSS TM Orthopaedic Salvage System (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana, USA). Outcome measures included clinical outcome scores, radiological analyses, reoperation rate and complications. At an average follow-up of 2,3 years (range, 0,6 to 4,2 years), the average Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) was 17,25 (range, 7 to 37), the average Oxford knee score was 35,25 (range, 25 to 41) and the average pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) was 0,5 (range, 0 to 1). 3 Patients had postoperative anemia but no implant related complications has been reported. Complex DFF of the elderly treated with mega knee arthroplasty exhibit good clinical outcomes scores. The patients should be selected carefully as the complication rate found in the literature remains high.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".