2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.10.057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Outcomes of Acetabular Reconstructions for the Management of Chronic Pelvic Discontinuity: A Systematic Review

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

5
47
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
5
47
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Data showed that both CTAC and acetabular distraction techniques had a less than 5% all-cause revision rate at mean mid-term follow-up. Being the most commonly used method, cup-cage construct had an 8.1% revision rate for the acetabular component [18]. Thus, as can be seen, our results of the distraction technique are encouraging.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Data showed that both CTAC and acetabular distraction techniques had a less than 5% all-cause revision rate at mean mid-term follow-up. Being the most commonly used method, cup-cage construct had an 8.1% revision rate for the acetabular component [18]. Thus, as can be seen, our results of the distraction technique are encouraging.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…The most common reason for reoperation after cupcage or CTAC reconstruction was dislocation [18]. Especially in the use of CTAC, the relatively bigger construct provided more access to prosthetic impingement, injury of the superior gluteal nerve, and soft tissue dissection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Data showed that both CTAC and acetabular distraction techniques had a less than 5% all-cause revision rate at mean midterm follow-up. Being the most commonly used method, cup-cage construct had an 8.1% revision rate for the acetabular component [18]. Thus can be seen, our results of the distraction technique are encouraging.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 52%
“…Data showed that both CTAC and acetabular distraction techniques had a less than 5% all-cause revision rate at mean midterm follow-up. Being the most commonly used method, cup-cage construct had an 8.1% revision rate for the acetabular component 19 . Thus can be seen, our results of the distraction technique are encouraging.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%