Long term results of total hip arthroplasty with cemented and cementless tapered femoral component
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: femoral stems have been reported. Reports regarding such cemented stems, however, are lacking. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term outcomes of both cemented and cementless THAs with the Taperloc femoral component. METHODS: The medical records of 71 patients (76 hips), operated on between January 1991 and December 2003, who had a minimum follow-up of 10 years were available for analysis. Functional analysis was performed with the Harris hip score (HHS) questionnaire and the numerical analogue scale (NAS). Radiographic analysis was performed for subsidence, radiolucent lines and osteolysis. RESULTS: The cohort was comprised of 47 female and 24 male patients, with a mean age of 59.7 ± 12.4 years. The mean follow-up was 17.8 ± 4.4 years. 52.6% of THAs analyzed were cementless and 47.4% were cemented. Post-operative radiographs were available for 57 surgeries. Subsidence, hypertrophic ossification, radiolucent lines and osteolysis were noted in 4 (7%), 2 (2.6%), 14 (18.4%) and 11 (14.5%) hips respectively. The average HHS score at a mean follow-up of 20.1 ± 3.9 years was 62.1 (±27.7) and the NAS score was 4.6 (±3.6). During the study period, five revision surgeries were performed due to stem-related problems, one of which was for aseptic loosening. CONCLUSIONS: Our long-term experience with the Taperloc stem, both cemented and cementless, demonstrates good outcomes, with low rates of failure. This makes this prosthesis an attractive option for THAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".