Double Segmental Femoral Fracture: A Rare Injury Following High-Energy Trauma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Femoral fractures are indubitably common injuries that can occur either from high-energy trauma in young patients or due to fragility in the geriatric population. Femoral fractures affecting two or more regions of the femur are exceedingly infrequent injuries, ordinarily caused by high-energy trauma and are considered segmental femoral fractures. We present a rare case of a 33-year-old male patient presented to our Emergency Department with multiple femoral fractures at the subtrochanteric, diaphyseal and supracondylar femoral regions, a condition regarded as double segmental femoral fracture. After assiduous consideration of treatment options, intramedullary nailing was employed for osteosynthesis. Fracture reduction was laborious, as an entirely separated femoral fragment was present between the fracture lines. The reaming process required paramount attentiveness as the middle femoral fragment was prone to rotational displacement by the reamer. Finally, the intramedullary nail was successfully placed, and the patient was discharged without complications after 11 days of hospitalization. Currently, the patient is capable of full weight-bearing without crutches. This paper underlines the challenges that double-segmental femoral fractures' treatment can bring on to the orthopedic surgeon.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".