1997
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.79b3.0790497
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Massive Prostheses for Malignant Bone Tumours of the Limbs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Devices to clamp soft tissues have been used in some prostheses. 2 In massive prostheses, non-absorbable sutures and slings have been used as the primary attachment mechanism. 1,4,5,8,9 Spiked devices for mechanical fixation have been studied experimentally and used clinically.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Devices to clamp soft tissues have been used in some prostheses. 2 In massive prostheses, non-absorbable sutures and slings have been used as the primary attachment mechanism. 1,4,5,8,9 Spiked devices for mechanical fixation have been studied experimentally and used clinically.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[1][2][3][4][5] The proximal tibia has certain anatomical limitations to its reconstruction. In particular there is a need for an effective method for reattachment of the patellar tendon.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…[6][7][8] When choosing which technique to use we should consider the long-term oncological and functional results, the expected survival age of the patient and the early and late complications of the type of reconstruction chosen. 9 Distraction osteogenesis (callus distraction) provides a biological method of reconstruction of the bone defect after resection of a tumour and is particularly useful for malignant tumours in young patients with a good long-term prognosis. 10,11 Vascularised fibular grafts are associated with rapid incorporation and union, and a low rate of infection, fracture, resorption and nonunion compared with non-vascularised grafts or allografts.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%