Individualized Implant: A surgical advice for rotational stability and additional proximal locking of the Fassier-Duval telescoping nail
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background When stabilizing fractures and osteotomies in growing patients with special conditions of the long bones, the use of the Fassier-Duval nail as intended by the manufacturer (Pega Medical, Quebec, Canada) [1], shows that one problem with passive telescopic nails has not yet been solved. No stability in the rotation can be achieved. Postoperative to immobilize with plaster casts are obsolete in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta, as additional osteopenia due to immobilization must be feared. Especially with fractures and osteotomies in proximal femur long leg spica casts are a torture to patients and caregivers.Methods By experience in different surgical procedures in usage of the Fassier-Duval nailing system a technical solution for rotational stability of the nail as well as for locking of the nail in the proximal and distal physis could be developed.Results A transverse slot can be cutted in all available diameters of the female parts to make the FD nail rotationally stable. A proximal locking hole can be drilled individually by the surgeon on the operating table. The technical solution to the problems is presented in two exemplary cases in this article.Conclusions Rotational stability and additional proximal locking options can be achieved by additionally individualization of the Fassier-Duval telescoping nail during surgery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".