2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.12.100
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mini-Subvastus Approach for Total Knee Arthroplasty

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
35
1
2

Year Published

2009
2009
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
1
35
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Our results are in accordance with most prior studies [4,15,20,25]. We assume this better result can be attributed to less scar formation resulting from less dissection, including the conservation of all vastus medialis attachments.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Our results are in accordance with most prior studies [4,15,20,25]. We assume this better result can be attributed to less scar formation resulting from less dissection, including the conservation of all vastus medialis attachments.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 83%
“…All studies which involve minimally subvastus approach have detected correct component orientation without differences compared with standard approach [4,9,12,15,20]. Using a mini-incision midvastus approach, Dalury and Dennis [8] found worse component orientation with the mini-incision technique; however, this study has been criticized by other authors [18].…”
Section: Resultscontrasting
confidence: 40%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Mini-subvastus approach · Subvastus approach · Minimally invasive · Total knee replacement [19]. Beim Vergleich von 25 minimalinvasiv mit 25 konventionell implantierten Knieprothesen stellten sie keinen Unterschied in der Präzision der Implantation und Achsausrichtung beider Verfahren fest [20].…”
Section: Introductionunclassified
“…Its proponents suggest quicker recovery, less blood loss, decreased softtissue trauma, less postoperative pain, and improved cosmetic outcomes. [3][4][5][6][7] However, potential drawbacks include longer tourniquet time, poor component placement, and early implant failure. [8][9][10][11][12] The potential benefits must be considered in terms of any additional risks caused by limited surgical exposure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%