Stress shielding following stemless anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Finite element analysis has suggested that stemless implants may theoretically decrease stress shielding. The purpose of this study was to assess the radiographic proximal humeral bone adaptations seen following stemless anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Methods A retrospective review of 152 prospectively followed stemless total shoulder arthroplasty utilizing a single implant design was performed. Anteroposterior and lateral radiographs were reviewed at standard time points. Stress shielding was graded as mild, moderate, and severe. The effect of stress shielding on clinical and functional outcomes was assessed. Also, the influence of subscapularis management on the occurrence of stress shielding was determined. Results At 2 years postoperatively, stress shielding was noted in 61 (41%) shoulders. A total of 11 (7%) shoulders demonstrated severe stress shielding with 6 occurring along the medial calcar. There was one instance of greater tuberosity resorption. At the final follow-up, no humeral implants were radiographically loose or migrated. There was no statistically significant difference in clinical and functional outcomes between shoulders with and without stress shielding. Patients undergoing a lesser tuberosity osteotomy had lower rates of stress shielding, which was statistically significant ( p = 0.021) Discussion Stress shielding does occur at higher rates than anticipated following stemless total shoulder arthroplasty, but was not associated with implant migration or failure at 2 years follow-up. Level of evidence IV, Case series.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".