Fracture Occurrence following Prophylactic Nailing in a Case of Bisphosphonate-induced Atypical Femoral Fracture – A Rare Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Bisphosphonates are effective in osteoporosis management but have been linked to atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) with prolonged use. The management of incomplete AFF remains controversial, particularly regarding the role of prophylactic fixation. Case Report: A 67-year-old female on long-term bisphosphonate therapy presented with a left subtrochanteric fracture following a minor fall. Imaging revealed an impending AFF in the contralateral right femur, leading to prophylactic intramedullary nailing. Six weeks postoperatively, she developed a minimally displaced fracture on the right femur, which was managed conservatively due to the minimal displacement of the fracture as a result of prophylactic nailing. She achieved full fracture healing and unaided mobility without additional surgical intervention. Conclusion: Prophylactic intramedullary nailing can effectively mitigate fracture displacement and the need for re-surgery in patients with impending AFF. However, further studies are needed to establish standardized management protocols.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".