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
The ideal construct for a rotator cuff repair continues to be a hot topic for debate and biomechanical investigation. A recent study shows that anchors could be placed as close as 1 mm apart without impact on pullout strength. However, further overlap (the buddy anchor construct) led to earlier failure. This conclusion differs from other studies that have recommended the "buddy anchor" construct as a bail-out option in osteoporotic bone. Biomechanical studies are an important source of information for surgical decision making, but often do not directly predict the in vivo environment. The final determination of anchor number and placement in a rotator cuff repair should be based on 4 factors: minimizing cost, avoiding complications, using appropriate technique, and proper restoration of anatomy.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2017.10.032 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!