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...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inKnee surgery & related research Vol. 35; no. 1; p. 5
Main Authors Ryu, Jae Joon, Kim, Yeong Hwan, Choi, Choong Hyeok
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England BioMed Central 01.02.2023
BMC
Subjects
Online AccessGet 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