Is there a place for conservative treatment of a Vancouver B2 fracture around a cemented polished tapered stem?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revision of the unstable stem of a total hip replacement following a peri-prosthetic fracture of the femur is a complex procedure with a high complication rate. With this study we aim to describe the radiologic findings of a specific fracture around polished tapered cemented stems and we present the results of a two- stage treatment plan for non-displaced Vancouver type B2 fractures. Eight male patients with a cemented polished, tapered stem presented after a fall. Standard radiographs did not show any direct signs of a fracture. CT scans showed a complex burst fracture with cement mantle cracks in all cases. Partial weight bearing with 2 crutches was initiated for at least 6 weeks. A cement- in-cement revision was conducted at 3 months in case the patient was not pain free. After 3 months of weight bearing as tolerated, none of the fractures had displaced any further, neither had the stem further subsided. Five patients were pain free and did not require surgical intervention. One patient underwent a cement-in-cement stem revision because of persistent pain. Normal radiographs of a post-traumatic and painful polished tapered stem do not exclude a Vancouver type B2 fracture and should be followed by a CT-scan. Cement cracks, eccentric gaps and subsidence are highly suspicious signs for a non-displaced fracture pattern. Conservative treatment remains an option for these fractures and can be followed by a cement- in-cement stem revision after fracture healing, if this is still required.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".