The additional tibial stem extension is not mandatory for the stability of 5 mm metal block augmented tibial prosthesis construct in primary total knee arthroplasty: 5-year minimum follow-up results
To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical...
Saved in:
Published in | Knee surgery & related research Vol. 35; no. 1; p. 5 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
England
BioMed Central
01.02.2023
BMC |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Abstract | To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical and radiologic results including survival rate of patients without stem extension.
We retrospectively analyzed patients with tibial bone defect, had undergone primary total knee arthroplasty, and had been treated with 5-mm metal block augmentation without stem extension between March 2003 and September 2013. Among 74 patients (80 cases), 47 patients (52 cases) were followed up for at least 5 years.
Mean flexion contracture improved from 8.8° (0-40°) preoperatively to 0.4° (-5° to 15°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), but there was no significant change in the mean angle of great flexion: 124.6° (75-150°) preoperatively and 126.2° (90-145°) at final follow-up (P = 0.488). Mean range of motion improved from 115.8° (35-150°) preoperatively to 125.5° (90-145°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). Mean knee score improved from 38.7 points (0-66 points) preoperatively to 93.2 points (79-100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), and mean functional score also improved from 50.4 points (10-70 points) preoperatively to 81.8 points (15-100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). The mean postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis score was 19.5 points (0-66.0 points). The mean femorotibial angle was corrected from 9.0° varus (23.0° varus-6.3° valgus) preoperatively to 5.5° valgus (2.2° varus-11.1° valgus) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). There was no change in the mean β-angle, which was 90.7° (87.2-94.9°) immediately postoperative and 90.8° (87.2-94.9°) at final follow-up (P = 0.748) and in the mean δ-angle, which was 86.2° (81.3-90.0°) immediately postoperative and 87.2° (83.1-96.5°) at final follow-up (P = 0.272). Radiolucent lines (RLL) were observed in ten cases (26.3%), and the mean RLL scores at final follow-up were 0.34 points (0-3 points) in the anteroposterior view and 0.42 points (0-6 points) in the lateral view. Scores for the RLL were ≤ 4 points in 36 cases, 5-9 points in two cases. Revision surgery due to aseptic loosening (three cases) is rarely required, and the Kaplan-Meier survival rate at 10 postoperative years was 96.4% CONCLUSION: When performing 5-mm metal block augmentation for a proximal tibial defect, no additional tibial stem extension can be a good surgical option for the stability of tibial prosthetic construct and mid-term clinical and radiologic results.
IV. |
---|---|
AbstractList | PurposeTo determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical and radiologic results including survival rate of patients without stem extension.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients with tibial bone defect, had undergone primary total knee arthroplasty, and had been treated with 5-mm metal block augmentation without stem extension between March 2003 and September 2013. Among 74 patients (80 cases), 47 patients (52 cases) were followed up for at least 5 years.ResultsMean flexion contracture improved from 8.8° (0–40°) preoperatively to 0.4° (−5° to 15°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), but there was no significant change in the mean angle of great flexion: 124.6° (75–150°) preoperatively and 126.2° (90–145°) at final follow-up (P = 0.488). Mean range of motion improved from 115.8° (35–150°) preoperatively to 125.5° (90–145°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). Mean knee score improved from 38.7 points (0–66 points) preoperatively to 93.2 points (79–100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), and mean functional score also improved from 50.4 points (10–70 points) preoperatively to 81.8 points (15–100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). The mean postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis score was 19.5 points (0–66.0 points). The mean femorotibial angle was corrected from 9.0° varus (23.0° varus–6.3° valgus) preoperatively to 5.5° valgus (2.2° varus–11.1° valgus) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). There was no change in the mean β-angle, which was 90.7° (87.2–94.9°) immediately postoperative and 90.8° (87.2–94.9°) at final follow-up (P = 0.748) and in the mean δ-angle, which was 86.2° (81.3–90.0°) immediately postoperative and 87.2° (83.1–96.5°) at final follow-up (P = 0.272). Radiolucent lines (RLL) were observed in ten cases (26.3%), and the mean RLL scores at final follow-up were 0.34 points (0–3 points) in the anteroposterior view and 0.42 points (0–6 points) in the lateral view. Scores for the RLL were ≤ 4 points in 36 cases, 5–9 points in two cases. Revision surgery due to aseptic loosening (three cases) is rarely required, and the Kaplan–Meier survival rate at 10 postoperative years was 96.4%ConclusionWhen performing 5-mm metal block augmentation for a proximal tibial defect, no additional tibial stem extension can be a good surgical option for the stability of tibial prosthetic construct and mid-term clinical and radiologic results.Level of evidenceIV. To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical and radiologic results including survival rate of patients without stem extension. We retrospectively analyzed patients with tibial bone defect, had undergone primary total knee arthroplasty, and had been treated with 5-mm metal block augmentation without stem extension between March 2003 and September 2013. Among 74 patients (80 cases), 47 patients (52 cases) were followed up for at least 5 years. Mean flexion contracture improved from 8.8° (0-40°) preoperatively to 0.4° (-5° to 15°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), but there was no significant change in the mean angle of great flexion: 124.6° (75-150°) preoperatively and 126.2° (90-145°) at final follow-up (P = 0.488). Mean range of motion improved from 115.8° (35-150°) preoperatively to 125.5° (90-145°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). Mean knee score improved from 38.7 points (0-66 points) preoperatively to 93.2 points (79-100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), and mean functional score also improved from 50.4 points (10-70 points) preoperatively to 81.8 points (15-100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). The mean postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis score was 19.5 points (0-66.0 points). The mean femorotibial angle was corrected from 9.0° varus (23.0° varus-6.3° valgus) preoperatively to 5.5° valgus (2.2° varus-11.1° valgus) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). There was no change in the mean β-angle, which was 90.7° (87.2-94.9°) immediately postoperative and 90.8° (87.2-94.9°) at final follow-up (P = 0.748) and in the mean δ-angle, which was 86.2° (81.3-90.0°) immediately postoperative and 87.2° (83.1-96.5°) at final follow-up (P = 0.272). Radiolucent lines (RLL) were observed in ten cases (26.3%), and the mean RLL scores at final follow-up were 0.34 points (0-3 points) in the anteroposterior view and 0.42 points (0-6 points) in the lateral view. Scores for the RLL were ≤ 4 points in 36 cases, 5-9 points in two cases. Revision surgery due to aseptic loosening (three cases) is rarely required, and the Kaplan-Meier survival rate at 10 postoperative years was 96.4% CONCLUSION: When performing 5-mm metal block augmentation for a proximal tibial defect, no additional tibial stem extension can be a good surgical option for the stability of tibial prosthetic construct and mid-term clinical and radiologic results. IV. Abstract Purpose To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical and radiologic results including survival rate of patients without stem extension. Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients with tibial bone defect, had undergone primary total knee arthroplasty, and had been treated with 5-mm metal block augmentation without stem extension between March 2003 and September 2013. Among 74 patients (80 cases), 47 patients (52 cases) were followed up for at least 5 years. Results Mean flexion contracture improved from 8.8° (0–40°) preoperatively to 0.4° (−5° to 15°) at final follow-up ( P < 0.01), but there was no significant change in the mean angle of great flexion: 124.6° (75–150°) preoperatively and 126.2° (90–145°) at final follow-up ( P = 0.488). Mean range of motion improved from 115.8° (35–150°) preoperatively to 125.5° (90–145°) at final follow-up ( P < 0.01). Mean knee score improved from 38.7 points (0–66 points) preoperatively to 93.2 points (79–100 points) at final follow-up ( P < 0.01), and mean functional score also improved from 50.4 points (10–70 points) preoperatively to 81.8 points (15–100 points) at final follow-up ( P < 0.01). The mean postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis score was 19.5 points (0–66.0 points). The mean femorotibial angle was corrected from 9.0° varus (23.0° varus–6.3° valgus) preoperatively to 5.5° valgus (2.2° varus–11.1° valgus) at final follow-up ( P < 0.01). There was no change in the mean β-angle, which was 90.7° (87.2–94.9°) immediately postoperative and 90.8° (87.2–94.9°) at final follow-up ( P = 0.748) and in the mean δ-angle, which was 86.2° (81.3–90.0°) immediately postoperative and 87.2° (83.1–96.5°) at final follow-up ( P = 0.272). Radiolucent lines (RLL) were observed in ten cases (26.3%), and the mean RLL scores at final follow-up were 0.34 points (0–3 points) in the anteroposterior view and 0.42 points (0–6 points) in the lateral view. Scores for the RLL were ≤ 4 points in 36 cases, 5–9 points in two cases. Revision surgery due to aseptic loosening (three cases) is rarely required, and the Kaplan–Meier survival rate at 10 postoperative years was 96.4% Conclusion When performing 5-mm metal block augmentation for a proximal tibial defect, no additional tibial stem extension can be a good surgical option for the stability of tibial prosthetic construct and mid-term clinical and radiologic results. Level of evidence IV. PURPOSETo determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical and radiologic results including survival rate of patients without stem extension. METHODSWe retrospectively analyzed patients with tibial bone defect, had undergone primary total knee arthroplasty, and had been treated with 5-mm metal block augmentation without stem extension between March 2003 and September 2013. Among 74 patients (80 cases), 47 patients (52 cases) were followed up for at least 5 years. RESULTSMean flexion contracture improved from 8.8° (0-40°) preoperatively to 0.4° (-5° to 15°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), but there was no significant change in the mean angle of great flexion: 124.6° (75-150°) preoperatively and 126.2° (90-145°) at final follow-up (P = 0.488). Mean range of motion improved from 115.8° (35-150°) preoperatively to 125.5° (90-145°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). Mean knee score improved from 38.7 points (0-66 points) preoperatively to 93.2 points (79-100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), and mean functional score also improved from 50.4 points (10-70 points) preoperatively to 81.8 points (15-100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). The mean postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis score was 19.5 points (0-66.0 points). The mean femorotibial angle was corrected from 9.0° varus (23.0° varus-6.3° valgus) preoperatively to 5.5° valgus (2.2° varus-11.1° valgus) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). There was no change in the mean β-angle, which was 90.7° (87.2-94.9°) immediately postoperative and 90.8° (87.2-94.9°) at final follow-up (P = 0.748) and in the mean δ-angle, which was 86.2° (81.3-90.0°) immediately postoperative and 87.2° (83.1-96.5°) at final follow-up (P = 0.272). Radiolucent lines (RLL) were observed in ten cases (26.3%), and the mean RLL scores at final follow-up were 0.34 points (0-3 points) in the anteroposterior view and 0.42 points (0-6 points) in the lateral view. Scores for the RLL were ≤ 4 points in 36 cases, 5-9 points in two cases. Revision surgery due to aseptic loosening (three cases) is rarely required, and the Kaplan-Meier survival rate at 10 postoperative years was 96.4% CONCLUSION: When performing 5-mm metal block augmentation for a proximal tibial defect, no additional tibial stem extension can be a good surgical option for the stability of tibial prosthetic construct and mid-term clinical and radiologic results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCEIV. Abstract Purpose To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal block augmentation for a tibial defect, where tibial prosthesis was fixed using bone cement without stem extension. Also, we evaluated clinical and radiologic results including survival rate of patients without stem extension. Methods We retrospectively analyzed patients with tibial bone defect, had undergone primary total knee arthroplasty, and had been treated with 5-mm metal block augmentation without stem extension between March 2003 and September 2013. Among 74 patients (80 cases), 47 patients (52 cases) were followed up for at least 5 years. Results Mean flexion contracture improved from 8.8° (0–40°) preoperatively to 0.4° (−5° to 15°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), but there was no significant change in the mean angle of great flexion: 124.6° (75–150°) preoperatively and 126.2° (90–145°) at final follow-up (P = 0.488). Mean range of motion improved from 115.8° (35–150°) preoperatively to 125.5° (90–145°) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). Mean knee score improved from 38.7 points (0–66 points) preoperatively to 93.2 points (79–100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01), and mean functional score also improved from 50.4 points (10–70 points) preoperatively to 81.8 points (15–100 points) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). The mean postoperative Western Ontario and McMaster University osteoarthritis score was 19.5 points (0–66.0 points). The mean femorotibial angle was corrected from 9.0° varus (23.0° varus–6.3° valgus) preoperatively to 5.5° valgus (2.2° varus–11.1° valgus) at final follow-up (P < 0.01). There was no change in the mean β-angle, which was 90.7° (87.2–94.9°) immediately postoperative and 90.8° (87.2–94.9°) at final follow-up (P = 0.748) and in the mean δ-angle, which was 86.2° (81.3–90.0°) immediately postoperative and 87.2° (83.1–96.5°) at final follow-up (P = 0.272). Radiolucent lines (RLL) were observed in ten cases (26.3%), and the mean RLL scores at final follow-up were 0.34 points (0–3 points) in the anteroposterior view and 0.42 points (0–6 points) in the lateral view. Scores for the RLL were ≤ 4 points in 36 cases, 5–9 points in two cases. Revision surgery due to aseptic loosening (three cases) is rarely required, and the Kaplan–Meier survival rate at 10 postoperative years was 96.4% Conclusion When performing 5-mm metal block augmentation for a proximal tibial defect, no additional tibial stem extension can be a good surgical option for the stability of tibial prosthetic construct and mid-term clinical and radiologic results. Level of evidence IV. |
ArticleNumber | 5 |
Author | Ryu, Jae Joon Kim, Yeong Hwan Choi, Choong Hyeok |
Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Jae Joon surname: Ryu fullname: Ryu, Jae Joon organization: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea – sequence: 2 givenname: Yeong Hwan surname: Kim fullname: Kim, Yeong Hwan organization: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea – sequence: 3 givenname: Choong Hyeok orcidid: 0000-0001-7401-9116 surname: Choi fullname: Choi, Choong Hyeok email: chhchoi@hanyang.ac.kr organization: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. chhchoi@hanyang.ac.kr |
BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726180$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
BookMark | eNpdks1u1DAUhSNUREvpC7BAltiwCfgvdswCCVX8VKrEpqwtx3Fm3Dr2YDvAvA3PwobX4k5nWlG8udbNOZ9v7PO0OYopuqZ5TvBrQnrxpnCGiWoxZS3GRPJWPGpOKGW8pbwjR4c9llQcN2elXGNYApO-E0-aYyagT3p80vy5WjtkxtFXn6IJqPrBQynVzcj9rC4W6CNfUEwVzSaOpqa8RVPKqIKzVDP44OsWpQl1v3_NM5pdBcAQkr1BZlnNLlY33nE3ORXwFQDaFEvNi63IR-j72QC3pp35JjoYKtd1TptgSt2-RV27dSaj2Uc_LzOcH0L60S4blF1ZQi3PmseTCcWdHepp8_Xjh6vzz-3ll08X5-8vW8uVqK0iorOTYZZTPmI1cio5sdOgKKFcUcmGaTDGMGqYMP0o2IAlt3BXEo-YO8dOm4s9d0zmWh_G1sl4fdtIeaVhcG-D044pyYeeT4oOnPUKijQU96PqrBDKAOvdnrVZhtmNFm4qm_AA-vBL9Gu9St-16hWWUgHg1QGQ07fFlapnX6wLwUSXlqKplERxClqQvvxPep2WDC8Oqp6rviNSClDRvcrCO5XspvthCNa72Ol97DTETt_GTu9ML_79jXvLXcjYX4pR2iY |
CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_3390_bioengineering10060632 |
Cites_doi | 10.1016/S0883-5403(89)80068-3 10.1016/S0883-5403(89)80027-0 10.3390/medicina58050634 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.11.012 10.1186/s43019-020-00080-1 10.1007/s11999-008-0424-z 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.10.011 10.1016/j.arth.2019.03.047 10.4055/cios.2018.10.3.337 10.1186/s43019-020-00081-0 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00004 10.4055/cios.2018.10.2.167 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00013 10.1016/S0883-5403(06)80109-9 10.1054/arth.2001.16486 10.1111/j.1747-1567.2012.00826.x 10.1097/01.blo.0000187340.10003.68 10.1016/0021-9290(83)90042-8 10.1097/00003086-199712000-00008 10.4055/cios.2014.6.2.165 10.1097/00003086-199110000-00016 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00003 10.1097/00003086-199110000-00009 10.2106/00004623-199503000-00007 10.1097/00003086-199910000-00017 10.2106/00004623-199072070-00007 10.4055/cios.2019.11.2.142 10.1302/0301-620X.93B11.27136 10.1097/01.blo.0000214437.57151.41 10.1097/00003086-199910000-00027 10.1186/1749-799X-8-36 10.1186/s12891-015-0689-9 10.1186/s13018-020-01921-1 10.1302/0301-620X.94B8.28289 10.1097/00003086-198205000-00042 10.1016/j.otsr.2019.05.025 10.1302/0301-620X.84B5.0840658 10.1016/j.arth.2004.03.002 |
ContentType | Journal Article |
Copyright | 2023. The Author(s). 2023. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. The Author(s) 2023 |
Copyright_xml | – notice: 2023. The Author(s). – notice: 2023. This work is licensed under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. – notice: The Author(s) 2023 |
DBID | NPM AAYXX CITATION 3V. 7X7 7XB 8FI 8FJ 8FK ABUWG AFKRA AZQEC BENPR CCPQU DWQXO FYUFA GHDGH K9. M0S PIMPY PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI 7X8 5PM DOA |
DOI | 10.1186/s43019-023-00174-6 |
DatabaseName | PubMed CrossRef ProQuest Central (Corporate) Health & Medical Collection ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016) Hospital Premium Collection Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016) ProQuest Central (Alumni) ProQuest Central ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest Central ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Central Health Research Premium Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition) Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE) ProQuest One Academic ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition MEDLINE - Academic PubMed Central (Full Participant titles) Directory of Open Access Journals |
DatabaseTitle | PubMed CrossRef Publicly Available Content Database ProQuest Central Essentials ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni) ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition) ProQuest One Community College ProQuest Hospital Collection Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Hospital Collection (Alumni) ProQuest Central ProQuest Health & Medical Complete Health Research Premium Collection ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition Health and Medicine Complete (Alumni Edition) ProQuest Central Korea ProQuest One Academic ProQuest Central (Alumni) MEDLINE - Academic |
DatabaseTitleList | Publicly Available Content Database PubMed CrossRef MEDLINE - Academic |
Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: DOA name: DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals url: https://www.doaj.org/ sourceTypes: Open Website – sequence: 2 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 3 dbid: 7X7 name: Health & Medical Collection url: https://search.proquest.com/healthcomplete sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
DeliveryMethod | fulltext_linktorsrc |
EISSN | 2234-2451 |
EndPage | 5 |
ExternalDocumentID | oai_doaj_org_article_e3974b84f92b438992b7a208d95c669a 10_1186_s43019_023_00174_6 36726180 |
Genre | Journal Article |
GroupedDBID | 0R~ 5-W 7X7 8FI 8FJ 8JR 8XY AAFWJ ABDBF ABUWG ACRMQ ADBBV ADUKV AFKRA AFPKN ALIPV ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS AOIJS BAWUL BENPR BFQNJ BMC C24 C6C CCPQU DIK EBS EF. ESX FYUFA GROUPED_DOAJ GX1 HMCUK HYE KQ8 M48 NPM OK1 PGMZT PIMPY ROL RPM RSV SOJ UKHRP AAYXX CITATION 3V. 7XB 8FK AZQEC DWQXO K9. PQEST PQQKQ PQUKI 7X8 5PM |
ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c496t-9165cfa3c424d09d42741cfb921249273bfbaaa32a36a8d63b074c26170d04ee3 |
IEDL.DBID | RPM |
ISSN | 2234-0726 2234-2451 |
IngestDate | Tue Oct 22 15:11:43 EDT 2024 Tue Sep 17 21:30:42 EDT 2024 Sat Oct 05 06:21:01 EDT 2024 Thu Oct 10 18:10:30 EDT 2024 Thu Sep 12 20:01:52 EDT 2024 Sat Sep 28 08:22:51 EDT 2024 |
IsDoiOpenAccess | true |
IsOpenAccess | true |
IsPeerReviewed | true |
IsScholarly | true |
Issue | 1 |
Keywords | Stem extension Bone defect Primary total knee arthroplasty 5-mm metal augmentation |
Language | English |
License | 2023. The Author(s). Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
LinkModel | DirectLink |
MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c496t-9165cfa3c424d09d42741cfb921249273bfbaaa32a36a8d63b074c26170d04ee3 |
Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ORCID | 0000-0001-7401-9116 |
OpenAccessLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9890779/ |
PMID | 36726180 |
PQID | 2849851776 |
PQPubID | 5068522 |
PageCount | 1 |
ParticipantIDs | doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_e3974b84f92b438992b7a208d95c669a pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9890779 proquest_miscellaneous_2771942077 proquest_journals_2849851776 crossref_primary_10_1186_s43019_023_00174_6 pubmed_primary_36726180 |
PublicationCentury | 2000 |
PublicationDate | 2023-02-01 |
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2023-02-01 |
PublicationDate_xml | – month: 02 year: 2023 text: 2023-02-01 day: 01 |
PublicationDecade | 2020 |
PublicationPlace | England |
PublicationPlace_xml | – name: England – name: London |
PublicationTitle | Knee surgery & related research |
PublicationTitleAlternate | Knee Surg Relat Res |
PublicationYear | 2023 |
Publisher | BioMed Central BMC |
Publisher_xml | – name: BioMed Central – name: BMC |
References | C Scott (174_CR26) 2012; 94 174_CR6 174_CR7 A Pérez-Blanca (174_CR34) 2008; 23 174_CR35 GJM Pasquier (174_CR39) 2020; 106 JM Cuckler (174_CR13) 2004; 19 SH Stern (174_CR31) 1997; 345 D Altchek (174_CR4) 1989; 4 174_CR19 S Hamai (174_CR22) 2015; 16 CS Radnay (174_CR24) 2006; 446 JH Lonner (174_CR27) 2001; 16 PB Murray (174_CR14) 1994; 309 JJ Rawlinson (174_CR25) 2008; 466 SH Lee (174_CR2) 2021; 32 AI Harris (174_CR9) 1995; 77 JJ Rawlinson (174_CR28) 2005; 440 SJ Song (174_CR17) 2019; 11 MS Kim (174_CR38) 2020; 15 A Hashemi (174_CR15) 2014; 38 MG Brand (174_CR5) 1989; 248 AC Filip (174_CR40) 2022; 58 K Murase (174_CR29) 1983; 16 J Wright (174_CR32) 1990; 72 JK Lee (174_CR12) 2011; 93 FC Ewald (174_CR20) 1989; 248 FM Khaw (174_CR41) 2002; 84 JA Rand (174_CR21) 1991; 271 RL Barrack (174_CR33) 1999; 367 MA Ritter (174_CR10) 1993; 8 YJ Choi (174_CR3) 2021; 32 JN Insall (174_CR16) 1989; 248 J-K Park (174_CR18) 2018; 10 BW Polascik (174_CR1) 2018; 10 GJ Fipp (174_CR8) 1989; 4 I-S Song (174_CR11) 2014; 6 S Tsukada (174_CR23) 2013; 8 DT Cawley (174_CR36) 2012; 27 D Reilly (174_CR30) 1982; 165 M Nugent (174_CR37) 2019; 34 |
References_xml | – volume: 4 start-page: 151 year: 1989 ident: 174_CR4 publication-title: J Arthroplasty doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(89)80068-3 contributor: fullname: D Altchek – volume: 4 start-page: 285 year: 1989 ident: 174_CR8 publication-title: J Arthroplasty doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(89)80027-0 contributor: fullname: GJ Fipp – volume: 58 start-page: 634 issue: 5 year: 2022 ident: 174_CR40 publication-title: Medicina doi: 10.3390/medicina58050634 contributor: fullname: AC Filip – volume: 23 start-page: 483 year: 2008 ident: 174_CR34 publication-title: Clin Biomech doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.11.012 contributor: fullname: A Pérez-Blanca – volume: 32 start-page: 60 year: 2021 ident: 174_CR2 publication-title: Knee Surg Rel Res doi: 10.1186/s43019-020-00080-1 contributor: fullname: SH Lee – volume: 466 start-page: 2639 year: 2008 ident: 174_CR25 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0424-z contributor: fullname: JJ Rawlinson – volume: 27 start-page: 390 year: 2012 ident: 174_CR36 publication-title: Clin Biomech doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2011.10.011 contributor: fullname: DT Cawley – volume: 34 start-page: 1626 issue: 8 year: 2019 ident: 174_CR37 publication-title: J Arthroplasty doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.03.047 contributor: fullname: M Nugent – volume: 10 start-page: 337 year: 2018 ident: 174_CR1 publication-title: Clin Orthop Surg doi: 10.4055/cios.2018.10.3.337 contributor: fullname: BW Polascik – volume: 32 start-page: 61 year: 2021 ident: 174_CR3 publication-title: Knee Surg Rel Res doi: 10.1186/s43019-020-00081-0 contributor: fullname: YJ Choi – volume: 248 start-page: 13 year: 1989 ident: 174_CR16 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00004 contributor: fullname: JN Insall – ident: 174_CR19 – volume: 10 start-page: 167 year: 2018 ident: 174_CR18 publication-title: Clin Orthop Surg doi: 10.4055/cios.2018.10.2.167 contributor: fullname: J-K Park – volume: 248 start-page: 71 year: 1989 ident: 174_CR5 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00013 contributor: fullname: MG Brand – volume: 8 start-page: 63 year: 1993 ident: 174_CR10 publication-title: J Arthroplasty doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(06)80109-9 contributor: fullname: MA Ritter – volume: 16 start-page: 107 year: 2001 ident: 174_CR27 publication-title: J Arthroplasty doi: 10.1054/arth.2001.16486 contributor: fullname: JH Lonner – volume: 38 start-page: 8 year: 2014 ident: 174_CR15 publication-title: Exp Tech doi: 10.1111/j.1747-1567.2012.00826.x contributor: fullname: A Hashemi – volume: 440 start-page: 107 year: 2005 ident: 174_CR28 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000187340.10003.68 contributor: fullname: JJ Rawlinson – volume: 16 start-page: 13 year: 1983 ident: 174_CR29 publication-title: J Biomech doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(83)90042-8 contributor: fullname: K Murase – volume: 345 start-page: 44 year: 1997 ident: 174_CR31 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-199712000-00008 contributor: fullname: SH Stern – volume: 6 start-page: 165 year: 2014 ident: 174_CR11 publication-title: Clin Orthop Surg doi: 10.4055/cios.2014.6.2.165 contributor: fullname: I-S Song – ident: 174_CR6 doi: 10.1097/00003086-199110000-00016 – volume: 248 start-page: 9 year: 1989 ident: 174_CR20 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-198911000-00003 contributor: fullname: FC Ewald – volume: 271 start-page: 63 year: 1991 ident: 174_CR21 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-199110000-00009 contributor: fullname: JA Rand – volume: 77 start-page: 373 year: 1995 ident: 174_CR9 publication-title: J Bone Joint Surg Am doi: 10.2106/00004623-199503000-00007 contributor: fullname: AI Harris – ident: 174_CR7 doi: 10.1097/00003086-199910000-00017 – volume: 72 start-page: 1003 year: 1990 ident: 174_CR32 publication-title: J Bone Joint Surg Am doi: 10.2106/00004623-199072070-00007 contributor: fullname: J Wright – ident: 174_CR35 – volume: 309 start-page: 116 year: 1994 ident: 174_CR14 publication-title: Clin Orthop contributor: fullname: PB Murray – volume: 11 start-page: 142 year: 2019 ident: 174_CR17 publication-title: Clin Orthop Surg doi: 10.4055/cios.2019.11.2.142 contributor: fullname: SJ Song – volume: 93 start-page: 1493 year: 2011 ident: 174_CR12 publication-title: J Bone Joint Surg Br doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B11.27136 contributor: fullname: JK Lee – volume: 446 start-page: 83 year: 2006 ident: 174_CR24 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000214437.57151.41 contributor: fullname: CS Radnay – volume: 367 start-page: 216 year: 1999 ident: 174_CR33 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-199910000-00027 contributor: fullname: RL Barrack – volume: 8 start-page: 36 year: 2013 ident: 174_CR23 publication-title: J Orthop Surg Res doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-8-36 contributor: fullname: S Tsukada – volume: 16 start-page: 225 year: 2015 ident: 174_CR22 publication-title: BMC Musculoskel Dis doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0689-9 contributor: fullname: S Hamai – volume: 15 start-page: 393 year: 2020 ident: 174_CR38 publication-title: J Orthop Surg Res doi: 10.1186/s13018-020-01921-1 contributor: fullname: MS Kim – volume: 94 start-page: 1009 year: 2012 ident: 174_CR26 publication-title: J Bone Joint Surg Br doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B8.28289 contributor: fullname: C Scott – volume: 165 start-page: 273 year: 1982 ident: 174_CR30 publication-title: Clin Orthop doi: 10.1097/00003086-198205000-00042 contributor: fullname: D Reilly – volume: 106 start-page: S135 year: 2020 ident: 174_CR39 publication-title: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2019.05.025 contributor: fullname: GJM Pasquier – volume: 84 start-page: 658 issue: 5 year: 2002 ident: 174_CR41 publication-title: J Bone Joint Surg Br doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.84B5.0840658 contributor: fullname: FM Khaw – volume: 19 start-page: 56 year: 2004 ident: 174_CR13 publication-title: J Arthroplasty doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.03.002 contributor: fullname: JM Cuckler |
SSID | ssj0000601856 |
Score | 2.2658186 |
Snippet | To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm metal... Abstract Purpose To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed... PurposeTo determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm... PURPOSETo determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed with 5-mm... Abstract Purpose To determine whether additional stem extension for stability is necessary, we performed mid-term follow-up of patients who had been managed... |
SourceID | doaj pubmedcentral proquest crossref pubmed |
SourceType | Open Website Open Access Repository Aggregation Database Index Database |
StartPage | 5 |
SubjectTerms | 5-mm metal augmentation Bone defect Clinical outcomes Confidence intervals Joint replacement surgery Knee Osteoarthritis Patients Polymethyl methacrylate Primary total knee arthroplasty Prostheses Range of motion Rheumatoid arthritis Stem extension Survival analysis |
SummonAdditionalLinks | – databaseName: Directory of Open Access Journals dbid: DOA link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Pi9QwFA-yJy-i-K-6SgRvEjaT5q83FZfFgycX9haSNHWHnbaLbZH5Nn4WL34tX5LOMCOCF0-FNk2Tvvfyfklefg-h14GyIGMUpOHOEx6oIk4yT9pmVXsqmFM-B8h-lheX_NOVuDpI9ZViwgo9cPlxZxEcJveat4b5lKkbLsoxqhsjgpSmQCNqDiZTZQym4Ijk7pSMlmcjB1U2BFwUSSMzJ_LIE2XC_r-hzD-DJQ-8z_l9dG-Bjfhdae4DdCf2D9EvkDFOAUFlPQ-X4x84UTPjvLidVsLwesT9MOEuLRmkHXUMMBUD7INyhaN7i4cWi58_ug53EbA49uDgbrCbv2bCzmZX7206IHIdR6gwDAvxLF73cD8TVuBpSC_f9BEa9S2nXwBkPm3fYkG2YE84sZh0cwff32yG72S-xTDVnzfT-Ahdnn_88uGCLIkZSOBGTjBAShFaVwfOeENNwxMHTmi9YSmVNQAi33rnXM1cLZ1uJEhd8ZC53xvKY6wfo5N-6ONTBD8pKN-mraC6hpli0FoY6ZzQTJlV3YoKvdkJyS7dsXneoqUtIrUgUptFamWF3ic57ksm7ux8AzTKLhpl_6VRFTrdaYFdDHq04MUNgFOl4Buv9o_BFNP-iuvjMEMZpVaGM6pUhZ4Updm3pJYK-q9phdSROh019fhJv77OdN9GG6jSPPsffXuO7rJsAike5xSdgKrEF4CqJv8yG9BvSu8kRA priority: 102 providerName: Directory of Open Access Journals – databaseName: ProQuest Central dbid: BENPR link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Lb9QwELZge-GCQLxSCjISN2Q16zh-cEEUtao4VAhRqbfIdpx21U2yNInQ_kF-FzNOsrAIcYrkOI6TeXo8_oaQtz7lXoaQs1JYx4RPFbOSO1aVy8ylObfKxQTZC3l-KT5f5VdTwK2b0ipnnRgVddl6jJEfgxo1WEdeyQ-b7wyrRuHu6lRC4z454LBSSBfk4OT04svXXZQF0UZ0LOEKZlCwVHE5n5zR8rgTwN6GgdliqK0Fk3vWKYL4_8vz_DuB8g-LdPaIPJxcSfpxpP1jci80T8hPoDvFJKExxkfHIyEU4ZppDHhjdIyuOtq0Pa0xjIC77BRcVwquIPQbcbu3tK1oTuua1gHcc-rA5t1SO1xHDM9yHnaDZ0ZuQgfj-XbCoqWrBtojhgXtW3z4tgkwp7tYkQGc9X77nuZsCyJGEdikHmp4_Xrd_mDDhsLqf1j33VNyeXb67dM5m2o1MC-M7EFnytxXNvOCizI1pUBYHF85w7G6NfhIrnLW2ozbTFpdSmAEJXyEgy9TEUL2jCyatgkvCPwjr1yFu0NZBotHr3VupLW55sossypPyLuZRsX0OUVcymhZjBQtgKJFpGghE3KCZNz1RDjt2NDeXReTdBYBvDLhtKgMd1gOHi7K8lSXJvdSGpuQo5kJiknGu-I3Rybkze42SCduudgmtAP0UWppBE-VSsjzkWd2M8kkcONSpwlRe9y0N9X9O83qJiKAG21gSHP4_2m9JA945G1MvjkiC2CC8ApcqN69nuTkF6rBHps priority: 102 providerName: ProQuest – databaseName: Scholars Portal Open Access Journals dbid: M48 link: http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwrV1Lb9QwELZKuXBBIF6BgozEDRmyjp9ICAGiqjhwYqXeLNtx2lU3Sdkkgv03_BYu_C3GTrJi0R45RUpsx_bMeD6_vkHohc-pFyFwUjLrCPO5JFZQR6pyUbicUytdOiD7RZwt2edzfn6E5nBHUwd2B6d2MZ7UcrN-9ePb9h0Y_Ntk8Eq87hhoqSbgfUgcdBkRN9BNymCmHo_yTXB_HJlzcE9ivjtzMOuef0o0_oew579HKP_ySad30O0JTOL3o_TvoqPQ3EO_QfI4HhMaV_nweCkER8JmnJa84_oYXnW4aXtcx4WEuM-OAbxiAIOQbmTu3uK2wvzXz7rGdYDOwQ7c3hW2w0Wi8Szncq_jtZHL0EGBvp3oaPGqgfeJxgL3bcx81QSo1CYFZQC83m_fYE62YGU4cpvUQw3_X6_b72S4xpvQDeu-u4-Wp5--fjwjU7gG4pkWPQybgvvKFp5RVua6ZJEZx1dO0xjgGmCSq5y1tqC2EFaVAnRBMp8Y4cuchVA8QMdN24RHCDrJS1fFDaKigPmjV4prYS1XVOpFUfEMvZyFZKbmmDSbUcKMIjUgUpNEakSGPkQ57lJGRu30ot1cmMlATQBgxpxilaYuRoSHh7Q0V6XmXghtM3Qya4GZtdSAb9cAWaWEfzzffQYDjbsutgntAGmkXGhGcykz9HBUml1NCiGh_SrPkNxTp72q7n9pVpeJBFwrDUXqx_-jbU_QLZpMIJ7SOUHHoCrhKWCt3j1LBvQHwjcsTw priority: 102 providerName: Scholars Portal |
Title | The additional tibial stem extension is not mandatory for the stability of 5 mm metal block augmented tibial prosthesis construct in primary total knee arthroplasty: 5-year minimum follow-up results |
URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36726180 https://www.proquest.com/docview/2849851776 https://search.proquest.com/docview/2771942077 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC9890779 https://doaj.org/article/e3974b84f92b438992b7a208d95c669a |
Volume | 35 |
hasFullText | 1 |
inHoldings | 1 |
isFullTextHit | |
isPrint | |
link | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwnV3NbtQwELbacuGCQPwFyspI3JC7ieNfbrRqqZBaVYhKe4tsx2lX3SSrblZo34Zn4cJrMXaSVRdx4pKVEidxdr7xjMfjbxD64FLqhPeclMxYwlwqiRHUkqrMcptyaqSNCbKX4vyafZ3x2R7i416YmLTv7PyoWdRHzfw25lYuazcd88SmVxcnWsGUTurpPtoHgD6YovfDbwo2KBaVozkjqaRi3CyjxHTFANGagKUiYYBmROwYpMjb_y9n8--cyQdG6OwpejJ4j_hz38tnaM83z9FvEDUOeUF9WA_3u0BwYGjGMcYdAmJ4vsJN2-E6RA7CwjoGbxWD9wfteqruDW4rzH_9rGtce3DJsQU7d4fN-ibydpbjc5dhn8itX8EDXTvwz-J5A-cjbwXu2nDzXeOhU_exCgM46N3mE-ZkA2qFA5lJva7h_YtF-4Oslxhm_OtFt3qBrs9Ov5-ck6E-A3FMiw7GScFdZXLHKCtTXbJAheMqq2moaA1-ka2sMSanJhdGlQKEL5mLFPBlyrzPX6KDpm38awR_kpO2CitCeQ4TRqcU18IYrqjUWV7xBH0chVQMn1PE6YsSRS_SAkRaRJEWIkHHQY7bloFCO55o72-KAUiFB0-MWcUqTW0oAQ8_0tBUlZo7IbRJ0OGIgmLQ61UBxlyDjyolvOP99jJoZFhmMY1v19BGykwzCghN0KseNNue5ALgmKk0QXIHTjtd3b0CShBZvwfQv_nvO9-ixzTiPuTiHKIDwId_Bx5VZyegRzM5QY-OTy-vvk1iXAKOX2YZHC-YmkQN-wPM7SsK |
link.rule.ids | 230,315,730,783,787,867,888,2109,2228,12068,21400,24330,27936,27937,31731,31732,33756,33757,43322,43817,53804,53806,74073,74630 |
linkProvider | National Library of Medicine |
linkToHtml | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1Lb9QwELagHOCCQLwCBYzEDVnNOo4dc0GAqBYoPbXS3izbcdpVN8nSJEL7B_ldzDjZhUWIUyTHcZzM0-PxN4S89in3MoSclcI6JnyqmJXcsaqcZS7NuVUuJsieyvm5-LLIF1PArZvSKrc6MSrqsvUYIz8CNaqxjryS79bfGVaNwt3VqYTGTXILcbiwgoFaqF2MBbFGiljAFYygYKnicntuppBHnQDm1gyMFkNdLZjcs00Rwv9ffuff6ZN_2KPje-Tu5EjS9yPl75MboXlAfgLVKaYIjRE-Oh4IoQjWTGO4G2NjdNnRpu1pjUEE3GOn4LhScASh34javaFtRXNa17QO4JxTBxbvitrhIiJ4ltth13hi5DJ0MJ5vJyRaumygPSJY0L7Fh6-aAHO6jvUYwFXvN29pzjYgYBRhTeqhhtevVu0PNqwprP2HVd89JOfHn84-ztlUqYF5oWUPGlPmvrKZF1yUqS4FguL4ymmOta3BQ3KVs9Zm3GbSFqUENlDCRzD4MhUhZI_IQdM24QmBf-SVq3BvKMtg6eiLItfS2rzgSs-yKk_Imy2NzPQ5Ji5kCmlGihqgqIkUNTIhH5CMu54Iph0b2usLM8mmCeCTCVeISnOHxeDhoixPi1LnXkptE3K4ZQIzSXhnfvNjQl7tboNs4oaLbUI7QB-lZlrwVKmEPB55ZjeTTAI3zoo0IWqPm_amun-nWV5G_G9daBhSP_3_tF6S2_Ozbyfm5PPp12fkDo98jmk4h-QAGCI8B2eqdy-ixPwCha0gJg |
linkToPdf | http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfV1bb9MwFLagkxAvCMQtMMBIvCGrqeP4shfEYNW4qJoQk_Zm2Y6zVWuS0qSa-gf5XRw7aaEI8VQpcV2n5zuXHB9_B6E3LqWOe5-TghlLmEsFMZxaUhaTzKY5NcLGAtkZPz1nny_yi6H-qR3KKrc2MRrqonEhRz4GM6pCH3nBx-VQFnH2cfpu-YOEDlJhp3Vop3EbHQjGs3SEDo5PZmffdhmXwDwiYztXcImMpILy7SkaycctA6grAi6MBMvNCN_zVJHQ_19R6N_FlH94p-l9dG8IK_H7HgcP0C1fP0Q_AQM4FAz1-T7cHw_BgboZx-R3yJTheYvrpsNVSCmEHXcMYSyGsBDG9RzeG9yUOMdVhSsPoTq24P-usVlfRj7PYjvtMpwfufItzOeagZcWz2u4HvkscNeEL1_XHta0it0ZIHDvNkc4JxtQNxxITqp1BT-_WDQ3ZL3EK9-uF137CJ1PT75_OCVD3wbimOId2E-eu9JkjlFWpKpggSLHlVbR0Oka4iVbWmNMRk3GjSw4gEIwF6nhi5R5nz1Go7qp_VME_5ETtgw7RVkGL5JOylxxY3JJhZpkZZ6gt1sZ6eFxdHytkVz3EtUgUR0lqnmCjoMYdyMDtXa80Kwu9aCp2kOExqxkpaI2tIaHD2FoKguVO86VSdDhFgR60PdW_0Zngl7vboOmhu0XU_tmDWOEmChGUyES9KTHzG4lGQc0TmSaILGHpr2l7t-p51eRDVxJBVOqZ_9f1it0B9RFf_00-_Ic3aUR5qEm5xCNAA_-BURWnX05qMwv2z4lww |
openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The+additional+tibial+stem+extension+is+not+mandatory+for+the+stability+of+5%C2%A0mm+metal+block+augmented+tibial+prosthesis+construct+in+primary+total+knee+arthroplasty%3A+5-year+minimum+follow-up+results&rft.jtitle=Knee+surgery+%26+related+research&rft.au=Jae+Joon+Ryu&rft.au=Yeong+Hwan+Kim&rft.au=Choong+Hyeok+Choi&rft.date=2023-02-01&rft.pub=BMC&rft.eissn=2234-2451&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186%2Fs43019-023-00174-6&rft.externalDBID=DOA&rft.externalDocID=oai_doaj_org_article_e3974b84f92b438992b7a208d95c669a |
thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2234-0726&client=summon |
thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2234-0726&client=summon |
thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2234-0726&client=summon |