A PHP Error was encountered

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

Tantalum is a good bone graft substitute in tibial tubercle advancement. | LitMetric

Tantalum is a good bone graft substitute in tibial tubercle advancement.

Clin Orthop Relat Res

Instituto de Cirugía Ortopédica y Traumatología de Barcelona, Barcelona 08034, Spain.

Published: May 2010

AI Article Synopsis

  • Porous tantalum is being explored as a viable substitute for bone grafts in tibial tuberosity anteriorization (TTA) for treating degenerative chondral lesions in the patellofemoral joint.
  • A study comparing 57 knees using porous tantalum implants to 51 knees with local tibial bone graft showed that functional outcomes, fusion rates, and patient satisfaction were as good or better with the tantalum option, while also simplifying the surgical process.
  • Overall, the findings suggest that porous tantalum could be an effective alternative to traditional bone grafts in this surgical procedure.

Article Abstract

Background: Porous tantalum is reportedly a good substitute for structural bone graft in several applications. So far, its use has not been reported in tibial tuberosity anteriorization (TTA) for treatment of isolated degenerative chondral lesions of the patellofemoral joint.

Questions/purposes: We asked whether the use of this material would produce similar standardized functional scores, pain (VAS), fusion rates, complications, and patient satisfaction to those for bone graft.

Patients And Methods: We performed a randomized, controlled trial in 101 patients (108 knees) scheduled for TTA comparing a porous tantalum implant (57 knees) with an autologous local tibial bone graft (51 knees). The minimum followup was 5 years (mean, 6.2 years; range, 5-8 years).

Results: At the last followup, clinical scores, fusion rates, and maintenance of the anteriorization either were better or similar for the TTA using the tantalum implant depending on the respective parameter. The operative technique was easier and shorter with the tantalum device. Complication and failure rates were greater using bone graft. Patient satisfaction was greater using the tantalum implant.

Conclusions: Porous tantalum provided a reasonable alternative to bone graft in TTA.

Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2853652PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1115-0DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bone graft
20
porous tantalum
12
fusion rates
8
patient satisfaction
8
tantalum implant
8
tantalum
7
bone
6
graft
5
tantalum good
4
good bone
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!