INTRAOPERATIVE FEMORAL FRACTURE DURING UNCEMENTED TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: DOES THE STEM LENGTH MATTER?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Short stems have been developed to conserve bone stock, especially in younger populations undergoing a total hip arthroplasty (THA), and showed similar functional outcomes compared to conventional stems. Recent literature suggested that stem length might be an independent risk factor for acute periprosthetic femoral fracture in direct anterior THA (1) or with different short stem designs (2). The purpose of the present study was to compare the incidence of acute periprosthetic femoral fractures, between stems of the same manufacture (Taperloc microplasty vs Taperloc complete), which have the same stem characteristics, except for the stem length which is 35 mm shorter in Taperloc microplasty during posterior and lateral THA. Our institution's arthroplasty database was searched for all primary total hip arthroplasties utilizing short femoral stems performed between August 2016 and August 2023. Pre-operative X-rays for each case were analysed to characterize the proximal femoral geometry, specifically the canal bone ratio (CBR) and canal flare index (CFI). Data analysis was performed to identify risk factors for periprosthetic fractures. For the time period assessed, 2107 femoral stems (Taperloc Microplasty:1727, Taperloc complete: 380) were implanted. Females constituted 53% of the cohort. The average patient age was 70±11 years. The periprosthetic fracture rate was 0.94%, with 20 periprosthetic fractures (Taperloc Microplasty:17, Taperloc complete: 3) excluding 2 greater trochanteric fractures (1 at each group), identified at follow-up of three months. There was no significant difference between the periprosthetic fracture rates between the two stems (0.98% vs 0.79%, p>0.72) The multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that the stem length, CBR, CFI, age, and gender were not risk factors for periprosthetic fracture. The present study demonstrated that both Taperloc Microplasty and Taperloc complete stems had similar rates of periprosthetic fractures, and the stem length was not a risk factor for a periprosthetic fracture during uncemented THA. 1. Tamaki T, Cementless Tapered-Wedge Stem Length Affects the Risk of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2018 Mar;33(3):805-809. 2. Staunton P. Acute Periprosthetic Hip Fracture with Short Uncemented Femoral Stems. J Arthroplasty 2024 accepted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".