MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403762635 · doi:10.1155/2024/6158822

Implant Survival of an Uncemented Modular Femoral Implant in Patients With Severe Femoral Bone Loss and 2‐Stage Hip Revision

2024· article· en· W4403762635 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Orthopedics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersZimmer Biomet
KeywordsMedicineImplantSurgeryStage (stratigraphy)Femoral boneTotal hip replacementDentistryFemur

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Purpose: Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is a challenging procedure especially in the presence of severe bone loss where implant fixation is compromised. The aim of this study was to evaluate implant survival, clinical outcome, and midterm results in a group of complex patients after femoral revision using an uncemented modular implant design. Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective study including 100 patients (101 hips) treated with revision THA using an uncemented modular implant design. We identified 51 hips as Paprosky types I‐II and 50 hips as Paprosky III‐IV bone defects. We reviewed operative reports and radiographs. Patients underwent a clinical examination to assess the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and completed patient‐reported outcome measures (PROM), including the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the EQ‐5D Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Minimum follow‐up was 2 years (average, 5.8 years; range, 2.0–9.4 years). Results: Among the cases, 46 hips were revised for infection in a 2‐stage procedure and 44 hips for aseptic loosening. 11 hips had periprosthetic fractures of Vancouver type B2 or B3. A total of 5 hips required revision with removal of the femoral implant and 11 patients experienced complications resulting in fracture ( n = 1), dislocation ( n = 10), and soft tissue revision ( n = 1). The 5‐year implant survival estimated by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was 95% (95%‐CI: 91%–99%). All hips had radiographic evidence of osseointegration and no one with subsidence greater than 5 mm. Additionally, 80% showed radiographic evidence of restoration of proximal femoral bone. Mean HHS was 78. Conclusion: In complex cases of revision THA, using a modular revision femoral system yielded promising results. The 5‐year implant survival estimated by Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was 95% (95%‐CI: 91%–99%), with all hips demonstrating radiographic evidence of osseointegration and no one with subsidence greater than 5 mm. Notably 80% showed radiographic evidence of restoration of proximal femoral bone.

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 score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.267 · 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