Giant Cell Reparative Granuloma in the Thumb Distal Phalanx: A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Giant cell reparative granulomas (GCRG) often affect the bones of the hands and the feet. Treatment of this lesion depends on the exact location and amount of localized bony destruction. Ours is the first case report to discuss the nuances of treating this lesion in the thumb distal phalanx. A 19-year-old male presented with lytic, destructive expansion of his left thumb distal phalanx; imaging was suggestive of an aneurysmal bone cyst. Open biopsy was interpreted as giant cell reparative granuloma. Curettage and bone grafting resulted in complete healing of the distal phalanx with an excellent range of motion and interphalangeal joint stability. GCRG is a rare, benign entity typically presenting as a lytic bone lesion. Despite the initial massive bony destruction, this lesion nevertheless healed with curettage and bone grafting with maintained flexor pollicis longus and extensor pollicis longus function, permitting excellent active motion postoperatively.
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) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".