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: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
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
We used 79 Wagner SL stems (Sulzer Orthopedics, Baar, Switzerland) in femoral revisions with a minimum 5-year follow-up. There were 11 dislocations. A limb length discrepancy and limp were frequent. One loosened stem was rerevised. The cumulative probability of not having a stem revision for any reason was 92.3% in the best case scenario. Stem subsidence was associated with poor femoral canal filling. Definite proximal new bone regeneration (50 hips) was associated with an absence of major bone defects (P = .01). Lateral and medial femoral cortex and the outside femoral diameter had increased at the end of follow-up (P < .001). Wagner SL femoral revision stems can solve difficult cases with major proximal bone defects or periprosthetic fractures. Radiographic bone fixation and bone regeneration were frequent. Dislocations and stem subsidence were also frequent.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2006.04.029 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!