2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.rco.2007.06.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Résultats de la prothèse fémoropatellaire autocentrique : à propos d’une série continue de 57 prothèses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
14
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
14
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A number of authors have reported better clinical outcomes in patients with arthritis secondary to trochlear dysplasia than in other groups. Gadeyne et al [26] found 68.2 % good and excellent results in the dysplasia group versus 44.4 % in the primary osteoarthritis group. Argenson et al [6] found 73 % good results in the dysplasia group and 54 % good results in the group with primary osteoarthritis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A number of authors have reported better clinical outcomes in patients with arthritis secondary to trochlear dysplasia than in other groups. Gadeyne et al [26] found 68.2 % good and excellent results in the dysplasia group versus 44.4 % in the primary osteoarthritis group. Argenson et al [6] found 73 % good results in the dysplasia group and 54 % good results in the group with primary osteoarthritis.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Operative treatment: Arthroscopy: 2 randomized controlled trials (165 and 168 patients) were included based on indirect evidence (Moseley et al 2002, Kirkley et al 2008)Chondroplasty, resection-arthroplasty, and lateral facetectomy: 1 prospective case series (50 patients) (Becker et al 2008) and 4 retrospective case series (11–63 patients) (Beltran 1987, Yercan et al 2005, Spak and Teitge 2006, Paulos et al 2008)Extensor mechanism alignment and lateral release: 2 prospective case series (35 and 50 patients) (Alemdaroglu et al 2008, Becker et al 2008), 2 retrospective comparative studies (12 and 48 patients) (Weaver et al 1991, Jacquot et al 2004), and 3 retrospective case series (14–50 patients) (Aderinto and Cobb 2002, Kohn et al 2004, Carofino and Fulkerson 2008)Patellectomy: no studies met the inclusion criteriaTotal knee arthroplasty: 2 matched case-control studies (94 and 54 patients) of total knee arthroplasty for isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis compared with total knee arthroplasty for tri-compartmental osteoarthritis (Laskin and Van Steijn 1999, Meding et al 2007), 1 prospective case series (24 patients) (Parvizi et al 2001), and 3 retrospective case series (25–47 patients) (Mont et al 2002, Dejour et al 2004, Dalury 2005)Patellofemoral arthroplasty: 3 systematic reviews of case series (538–812 patients) (Leadbetter et al 2005, 2006, Becher et al 2008), 5 prospective case series (15–240 patients) (Arnbjornsson and Ryd 1998, Tauro et al 2001, Merchant 2004, Ackroyd and Chir 2005, Ackroyd et al 2007), and 16 retrospective case series (12–65 patients) (Arciero and Toomey 1988, Cartier et al 1990, Argenson et al 1995, Krajca-Radcliffe and Coker 1996, Mertl et al 1997, De Cloedt et al 1999, Fink et al 1999, de Winter et al 2001, Smith et al 2002, Kooijman et al 2003, Board et al 2004, Argenson et al 2005, Cartier et al 2005, Merchant 2005, Sisto and Sarin 2006, Gadeyne et al 2008). …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patellofemoral arthroplasty: 3 systematic reviews of case series (538–812 patients) (Leadbetter et al 2005, 2006, Becher et al 2008), 5 prospective case series (15–240 patients) (Arnbjornsson and Ryd 1998, Tauro et al 2001, Merchant 2004, Ackroyd and Chir 2005, Ackroyd et al 2007), and 16 retrospective case series (12–65 patients) (Arciero and Toomey 1988, Cartier et al 1990, Argenson et al 1995, Krajca-Radcliffe and Coker 1996, Mertl et al 1997, De Cloedt et al 1999, Fink et al 1999, de Winter et al 2001, Smith et al 2002, Kooijman et al 2003, Board et al 2004, Argenson et al 2005, Cartier et al 2005, Merchant 2005, Sisto and Sarin 2006, Gadeyne et al 2008). …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…La trochlée de cette prothèse était un implant de resurfaçage, dont le caractère symétrique laissait pourtant persister des subluxations fréquentes. En France, les prothèses du groupe Guépar, l'Autocentric™ de Grammont et la Spherocentric™ (FH Orthopedics), développées à la fin des années 1980, ont donné des résultats plus encourageants [3,7,20,26]. En France, les prothèses du groupe Guépar, l'Autocentric™ de Grammont et la Spherocentric™ (FH Orthopedics), développées à la fin des années 1980, ont donné des résultats plus encourageants [3,7,20,26].…”
Section: Prothèses Fémoro-patellaires : Modèles D'implants Et Techniqunclassified