2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2007.09.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The SMILES prosthesis in salvage revision knee surgery

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The increasing number of difficult revision cases has led to the development of implant systems that provide a solution for the surgeon when he is confronted with these deficiencies at the same time [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. These systems have been used in the past for artificial reconstruction of the knee joint after radical bone and/or soft tissue resection for tumour cases in or around the knee [15][16][17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increasing number of difficult revision cases has led to the development of implant systems that provide a solution for the surgeon when he is confronted with these deficiencies at the same time [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. These systems have been used in the past for artificial reconstruction of the knee joint after radical bone and/or soft tissue resection for tumour cases in or around the knee [15][16][17].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Different surgical reconstruction methods, such as allograft augmentation for large bone defects, different types of arthrodesis, or even amputations have been described in small series for these exceptionally demanding cases [3,[10][11][12][13][14]. Modular-hinged implants provide the opportunity of bridging large bone defects and restoring a stable joint situation even when stabilizing ligaments structures have been lost in prior operations [15][16][17]. Availability and modularity are key factors for the use of these implants and its advantage in comparison with other techniques.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No statistically significant difference has been observed between septic and aseptic KRI indication (p = 0.84) Arch Orthop Trauma Surg in accordance to our findings, the importance of comorbidities and the patient's age as factors negatively influencing reinfection rates. Furthermore, Back et al report of 10 % infections in a series of 29 patients after knee salvage using the custom made rotating-hinge SMILES Ò (Stanmore Modular Individualized Lower Extremity System; Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Stanmore, UK) knee revision implant leading to one amputation [15]. Sanguineti et al observed one (20 %) reinfection out of five patients treated with the Endo-Model rotating-hinge revision knee after septic indication [23].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Long-term followup studies indicate a survival rate of at least 90% within 15 years [1,2]. Primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using modern implants results in more than 95% good to excellent results [3].…”
Section: Editorialmentioning
confidence: 99%