Finite element analysis part 2 of 2: Glenohumeral bone stress distribution depends on implant configuration for anatomic and reverse stemless shoulder implants
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Our purpose was to quantify stresses in the bone surrounding stemless implants in various configurations. Methods: A detailed finite element model of the glenohumeral joint was used to simulate abduction kinematics before and after arthroplasty and to measure bone stresses around the implants. Two digital patients were simulated: one healthy and one with supraspinatus muscle impairment (deficiency). Two anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) configurations were placed in a 135° cutting plane. Two reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) configurations with cutting angles of 135° and 145° were simulated with asymmetrical and symmetrical polyethylene cups, respectively, to obtain humeral neck-shaft angles of 145°. Results: Compared with preoperative models, TSA preserved and RSA restored abduction kinematics. The bone mechanical stresses were located mainly around the central stud of the TSA and were more peripheral to the RSA humeral components. The RSA configuration with the 145° cutting angle and symmetrical cup generated the lowest maximal bone stress and bone volume involvement. Stresses in the scapular cortical bone were highest in the supraspinatus fossa for TSA and the crest of the acromion for RSA. Conclusion: Early stability and glenohumeral bone stress change with implant configuration and should not be extrapolated from anatomic clinical data to reverse configurations. Level of Evidence: Diagnostic tests or criteria; Level 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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it