Femoral offset restoration affects the outcome of revision in patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures of Vancouver B2 -a single- center retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Femoral offset (FO) restoration plays an important role in improving the prognosis and life quality of patients undergoing hip replacement. However, it is not given enough attention in revisions of patients with periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPFF) while more attention is paid to reduction, fixation of fracture and stabilizing prosthesis. This study aims to evaluate the effect of FO restoration on the function of hip joint in revisions of patients with PPFF of Vancouver B2. What’s more, we study whether there is a difference in FO restoration between modular and nonmodular stems. Methods: A retrospective review of 20 patients with PPFF of Vancouver B2 revised with a tapered fluted modular titanium stem and 22 patients with PPFF of Vancouver B2 revised with a tapered fluted nonmodular titanium stem from 2016 to 2021 was conducted. According to the difference between FO of affected side and healthy side, 26 patients were divided into Group A(difference≤4mm) and 16 patients were divided into Group B(difference＞4mm). Postoperative Harris Hip Score（HHS）,range of motion of hip joint, length of both lower limbs and dislocation were compared between Group A and Group B. Proportion of patients with FO restoration (difference≤4mm)and stem subsidence were compared between modular and nonmodular groups. Results: The mean follow-up time was 34.3±17.3 months, and all cases achieved fracture healing at the last visit. Patients of Group A had higher HHS, larger range of abduction, fewer dislocations and less limbs length discrepancy (LLD). Patients of modular group had a higher proportion of FO restoration and less subsidence. Conclusion: FO restoration improves the postoperative hip joint function，reduces dislocation and LLD in revisions of patients with PPFF of Vancouver B2. Compared with nonmodular prosthesis, modular prosthesis tends to be easier for FO restoration under complex circumstances.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".