Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a navigation device in a cohort of 42 total knee arthroplasties (TKA). The patients were randomised into two groups. Total knee arthroplasties performed using the conventional technique formed the control group (21 knees); the experimental group included 21 knees performed with the aid of a computed navigation system. Postoperative mean values for the various measurements showed no significant difference in component alignment. However, the range of individual measurements for coronal and sagittal plane positioning was smaller in the navigated group, in which there were no outliers. Rotational alignment was not different between the two groups. This confirms the advantages and limitations of navigated TKA presented in larger studies.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!