MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Total hip arthroplasty for acute acetabular fractures through the replace-in-situ philosophy

2025· article· en· W4412844140 on OpenAlexaff
Boopalan Ramasamy, John M. Abrahams, Alexandra C. Bunting, Kerry Costi, Lucian B. Solomon, Stuart A. Callary

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Bone & Joint Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic and Acetabular Injuries
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeriprostheticSurgeryAcetabular fractureInternal fixationTotal hip arthroplastyReduction (mathematics)OsteoarthritisFemoral headAcetabulumArthroplasty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: This study investigated the outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed for acute acetabular fractures through a replace-in-situ technique, where no attempt was made at fracture reduction, fixation, or restoration of columns before acetabular component insertion. Methods: We report the clinical outcomes at a mean follow-up of five years of 41 acute complex acetabular fractures in 41 patients, with a mean age of 76 years (54 to 97), who underwent THA through a replace-in-situ technique. Results: Four patients died during the acute episode of care, and one within 12 months. All fractures healed within six months and all patients who survived the acute episode of care returned to their baseline function. A total of four patients underwent further surgery: one underwent revision for cup loosening at 18 months, one underwent open reduction and internal fixation of a femoral periprosthetic fracture at seven years, and two underwent head-liner exchange at two and four months for recurrent dislocation. One additional cup was radiologically loose but not revised, as this caused no additional symptoms. Conclusion: THA using a replace-in-situ technique shows promising results comparable to those reported for fix-and-replace techniques. As clinical outcomes continue to be inferior to those of THA for osteoarthritis, larger multicentre studies are required to investigate possible differences between surgical indications and techniques.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.292 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Bone & Joint JournalSame topicPelvic and Acetabular InjuriesFrench-language works237,207