Mid- to long-term outcomes of cementless modular, fluted, tapered stem for massive femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Revision total hip arthroplasty is frequently accompanied by bone loss. The purpose of this study is to evaluate mid- to long-term results of revision total hip arthroplasty for massive femoral bone loss using cementless modular, fluted, tapered stems.Methods: During the period of 2007 to 2015 at a single hospital, 34 hips (33 patients) underwent primary revision surgery with cementless modular, fluted, tapered stems due to massive bone loss, and patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI) or tumours were excluded. The hips were revised with the LINK MP (Waldemar Link, Hamburg, Germany) prosthesis. Bone loss was categorized by the Paprosky classification for prosthesis loosening and Vancouver classification for peri-prosthetic fracture. All revision bearing surfaces were ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC). Clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes and survivorship were evaluated.Results: The mean follow-up was 9.1±2.5 years (range, 5-13 years). The Harris hip score was 43.6±11.5 preoperatively and maintained at 86.5±6.6 at the time of latest follow-up (p<0. 05). The X-ray showed bone ingrowth fixation in 30 hips (88%), fibrous stable fixation in 3 hips (9%) and instability in 1 hip (3%). The average stem subsidence was 3.9±2.2 mm (range, 1 to 10 mm). The survivorship of prostheses with re-revision for any reason was 95% (95% CI, 12.0 to 13.0) at the 10-year follow-up. Three (9%) re-revisions were needed, including 1 for aseptic loosening, 1 for dislocation and 1 for infection.Conclusions: The mid- to long-term results of revision total hip arthroplasty with the cementless modular, fluted, tapered stem (LINK MP stem) are encouraging for massive femoral bone loss.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".