The purpose of this form is to provide readers of your manuscript with information about your other interests that could influence how they receive and understand your work. The form is designed to be completed electronically and stored electronically. It contains programming that allows appropriate data display. Each author should submit a separate form and is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the submitted information. The form is in six parts. Identifying information. The work under consideration for publication. This section asks for information about the work that you have submitted for publication. The time frame for this reporting is that of the work itself, from the initial conception and planning to the present. The requested information is about resources that you received, either directly or indirectly (via your institution), to enable you to complete the work. Checking "No" means that you did the work without receiving any financial support from any third party-that is, the work was supported by funds from the same institution that pays your salary and that institution did not receive third-party funds with which to pay you. If you or your institution received funds from a third party to support the work, such as a government granting agency, charitable foundation or commercial sponsor, check "Yes". Relevant financial activities outside the submitted work. This section asks about your financial relationships with entities in the bio-medical arena that could be perceived to influence, or that give the appearance of potentially influencing, what you wrote in the submitted work. You should disclose interactions with ANY entity that could be considered broadly relevant to the work. For example, if your article is about testing an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antagonist in lung cancer, you should report all associations with entities pursuing diagnostic or therapeutic strategies in cancer in general, not just in the area of EGFR or lung cancer. Report all sources of revenue paid (or promised to be paid) directly to you or your institution on your behalf over the 36 months prior to submission of the work. This should include all monies from sources with relevance to the submitted work, not just monies from the entity that sponsored the research. Please note that your interactions with the work's sponsor that are outside the submitted work should also be listed here. If there is any question, it is usually better to disclose a relationship than not to do so. For grants you have received for work outside the submitted work, you should disclose support ONLY from entities that could be perceived to be affected financially by the published work, such as drug companies, or foundations supported by entities that could be perceived to have a financial stake in the outcome. Public funding sources, such as government agencies, charitable foundations or academic institutions, need not be disclosed. For example, if a government agency sponsored a study in which you have been involved and drugs...

Periosteal chondromas are rare benign cartilaginous tumors that arise adjacent to the cortex beneath the periosteum. These lesions are usually slow-growing and rarely exceed 3 cm in the greatest dimension. Here, we describe a 17-year-old boy who had a giant periosteal chondroma of the right distal femur, which was treated with intralesional resection and intensive curettage. In addition, we report a novel application of a bioresorbable plate in the management of the large bone defect after resection of a benign bone tumor.

Normal bone shape was predicted with an acceptable accuracy from its partial shape using statistical learning. Predicted shape can be an alternative to a mirror image, which may enable reduced radiation exposure and examination costs.

Background Three-dimensional preoperative planning was applied for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures. The objective of this study was to evaluate the reproducibility of three-dimensional preoperative planning for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures with three-dimensional reference points. Methods Sixty-three wrists of 63 distal radius fracture patients who underwent osteosynthesis with three-dimensional preoperative planning were evaluated. After taking preoperative CT scans of the injured wrists, 3D images of the distal radius were created. Fracture reduction, implants choices, and placements simulation were performed based on the 3D images. One month after the surgery, postoperative CT images were taken. The reproducibility was evaluated with preoperative plan and postoperative 3D images. The images were compared with the three-dimensional coordinates of radial styloid process, volar and dorsal edges of sigmoid notch, and the barycentric coordinates of the three reference points. The reproducibility of the preoperative plan was evaluated by the distance of the coordinates between the plan and postoperative images for the reference points. The reproducibility of radial inclination and volar tilt on three-dimensional images were evaluated by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Results The distances between the preoperative plan and the postoperative reduction for each reference point were (1) 2.1±1.3 mm, (2) 1.9±1.2 mm, and (3) 1.9±1.2 mm, respectively. The distance between the preoperative plan and postoperative reduction for the barycentric coordinate was 1.3±0.8 mm. ICCs were 0.54 and 0.54 for the volar tilt and radial inclination, respectively (P<0.01). Conclusions Three-dimensional preoperative planning for the osteosynthesis of distal radius fracture was reproducible with an error of about 2 mm for each reference point and the correlations of reduction shapes were moderate. The analysis method and reference points may be helpful to understand the accuracy of reductions for the three-dimensional preoperative planning in the osteosynthesis of distal radius fractures. Trial registration Registered as NCT02909647 at ClinicalTrials.gov

No abstract