2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2006.02.018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pyrolytic Carbon Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Resurfacing Arthroplasty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
65
0
2

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 108 publications
(68 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
1
65
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The manufacturers initially stated that the implant had the potential for bony ingrowth, but recent studies have confirmed that no bony ingrowth occurs between pyrocarbon and the surrounding bone. 13 Bravo and colleagues, Nunley and colleagues, and Tuttle and Stern [13][14][15] have reported on retrospective series of patients who have pyrocarbon implants inserted for PIP arthritis.…”
Section: Pyrocarbonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The manufacturers initially stated that the implant had the potential for bony ingrowth, but recent studies have confirmed that no bony ingrowth occurs between pyrocarbon and the surrounding bone. 13 Bravo and colleagues, Nunley and colleagues, and Tuttle and Stern [13][14][15] have reported on retrospective series of patients who have pyrocarbon implants inserted for PIP arthritis.…”
Section: Pyrocarbonmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The desirability of silicone replacement is limited by particulate synovitis and ultimate fracture of the implant in a younger, high-demand patient [1,13]. The desirability of surface replacement is limited by the modest ROM, dislocation, squeaking joints, and prosthetic loosening/subsidence at the prosthesis-bone interface [2,6,7,13,15,16]. When used for post-traumatic cases as opposed to arthritis, the results may be even worse [12].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most patients are unwilling to accept the donor site morbidity in the foot for such limited motion in the finger and decline that option when offered. When both sides of the joint have lost articular cartilage, but motion is still desired, the remaining options are silicone or surface total joint replacement [1,2,6,7,11,12,15,16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Y con respecto a las artroplastias de carbono pirolítico, también hay diferencias considerables según el autor consultado. Así, mientras que Nunley et al 10 , abandonaron prematuramente un trabajo clínico prospectivo con este tipo de artroplastias al obtener en sus primeros 5 casos unos muy malos resultados y con complicaciones añadidas, y que Tuttle y Stern 11 consideraron dicho procedimiento como impredecible, en cuanto a resultados se refiere, tenemos a Schulz et al 12 , quienes en un estudio retrospectivo sobre 20 pacientes con artrosis postraumática y con un seguimiento medio entre 6 meses y 3 años, consideran que la artroplastia de carbono pirolítico es una buena opción de tratamiento para este tipo de casos. Nuestro trabajo puede equipararse a este último, si bien apuntamos también, la necesidad de un estudio con más número de casos y a más largo plazo para sacar conclusiones válidas al respecto.…”
Section: Discussionunclassified