Long-term outcomes and complications of Periprosthetic Fractures of the Proximal Femur: A Retrospective Review of 48 Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Periprosthetic fractures, especially periprosthetic proximal femur fractures, are an increasingly important orthopaedic problem. The aim of this study is to evaluate long-term results, mortality and complications of periprosthetic fractures. Methods: Patients who had proximal femur periprosthetic fracture were evaluated retrospectively. Patients with Vancouver type B1 and C were treated with plate-screw osteosynthesis and patients with Vancouver type B2 were operated using revision femoral systems. Follow-up was evaluated by clinical and radiographic, and functional results were assessed by Gos scoring. Results: Totally 48 patients were evaluated retrospectively. 16 patients (33.3%) were type B1, 18 patients (37.5%) were type B2 and 14 patients (29.2%) were type C. 30 patients (62.5%) with type B1 and C were treated with plate screw osteosynthesis and 18 patients (37.5%) with type B2 treated with revision femoral systems. There was a significant correlation between the surgical method applied and both mortality and preop/postop GOS scoring systems (p
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".