MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388915026 · doi:10.1016/j.jseint.2023.10.011

Two-year minimum survivorship and radiographic analysis of a pressfit short humeral stem for total shoulder arthroplasty

2023· article· en· W4388915026 on OpenAlex
Gabriel Larose, William R. Aibinder, Alexander T. Greene, Christopher Roche, Sean G. Grey, Kenneth J. Faber, Howard Routman, Samuel Antuña, Thomas W. Wright, Pierre-Henri Flurin, Joseph D. Zuckerman, Mandeep S. Virk

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJSES International · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHand and Upper Limb Clinic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCalcarArthroplastyRadiographyShouldersRadiodensityStress shieldingHumerusRange of motionSurgeryFixation (population genetics)OrthodonticsImplantPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Newer generation humeral stem designs in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are trending towards shorter lengths and uncemented fixation.The goal of this study is to report a 2-yr minimum clinical and radiographic outcomes of an uncemented short-stem press-fit humeral stem in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA).Methods: A retrospective multicenter database review was performed of all patients who received an uncemented short-length press-fit humeral stem (Equinoxe Preserve humeral stem, Exactech, Inc., Gainesville, FL, USA) in ATSA and RTSA with a minimum two-year follow-up.The primary outcome was the prevalence of humeral stems at risk of radiographic loosening.Secondary outcomes included evaluation of functional outcome scores and prevalence of revision TSA for humeral stem loosening.Two blinded observers performed radiographic analyses, which included humeral stem alignment, canal filling ratio, radiolucent lines, stress shielding (calcar and greater tuberosity), and changes in component position (subsidence and stem shift).At risk stems were defined by the presence of one or more of the following: humeral stem with shifting or subsidence, scalloping of the humeral cortex, or radiolucent lines measuring 2 mm or greater in 3 or more zones.Results: 287 patients (97 ATSA and 190 RTSA) were included in this study.The mean follow-up was 35.9 (6.1) months.There were significant improvements for all functional outcome scores (P < .05),range of motion (P < .05),and visual analogue pain scale pain (P < .05).The prevalence of humeral stem at risk of radiographic loosening was 1% in the ATSA group (1/97) and 18.4% in the RTSA group (35/190).Calcar resorption was seen in 34% of ATSA and 19% of RTSA, with severe resorption in 12.4% of ATSA and only 3.2% of RTSA.Greater tuberosity resorption was present in 3.1% of ATSA and 7.9% of RTSA.The mean canal filling ratio was 50.2% (standard deviation 11.2%).Using logistic regression, a significant positive correlation between canal filling ratio and stress shielding (P < .01)was seen for both calcar and tuberosity stress shielding.The revision surgery rate was 0% in ATSA compared to 1.6% in RTSA.Conclusion: This retrospective study demonstrates a low revision rate and low prevalence of humeral stems at risk of radiographic loosening at two years with a press-fit short-stem humeral design in ATSA.Physiologic subsidence of humeral stems can account for higher prevalence of humeral stems at radiographic risk of loosening in RTSA compared to ATSA

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it