MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400840482 · doi:10.52198/24.sti.44.os1798

Use of a Novel Reverse Hip Replacement System to Address Dislocation and Instability

2024· review· en· W4400840482 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adolph V. Lombardi

Bibliographic record

VenueSurgical Technology Online · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePelvisFemoral headAcetabulumArthroplastySurgeryHip replacementRange of motionTotal hip replacementFood and drug administrationOrthodontics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an enormously successful treatment for patients with end-stage degenerative arthritis of the hip, and surgeons have optimized existing hip implants and techniques, dislocation and instability persist as a leading cause of failure. Given the tremendous success of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in enhancing the stability of shoulder reconstruction by reversing the anatomic seating of the ball and socket components, one manufacturer (Hip Innovation Technology, LLC, Woodstock, Georgia) has developed a novel Reverse Hip Replacement System (Reverse HRS) to address the need for greater stability in reconstruction of the arthritic hip joint. Rather than the traditional anatomic components that replace the head of the femur with a spherical ball and the acetabulum with a socket with polyethylene liner mounted into the pelvis, the Reverse HRS features a cup with polyethylene liner attached to the femoral stem and a spherical metal head attached to a central trunnion inside of the porous-coated acetabular shell fixed into the pelvis. This design provides dramatically enhanced stability and improved range of motion. This article reviews relevant published literature, including results from a Canadian clinical trial and case reports from a multicenter American clinical trial monitored by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It also describes the components and surgical technique of reverse THA.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.903

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSurgical Technology OnlineSame topicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplastyFrench-language works237,207