nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.04.2020 | Review

Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review

verfasst von: M. Formica, D. Vallerga, A. Zanirato, L. Cavagnaro, M. Basso, S. Divano, L. Mosconi, E. Quarto, G. Siri, L. Felli

Erschienen in: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY | Ausgabe 1/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The aim of this meta-analysis and systematic review is to summarize and critically analyze the influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative spine diseases. A systematic review of the literature was carried out with a primary search being performed on Medline through PubMed. The 2009 PRISMA flowchart and checklist were taken into account. Sixty-seven articles were included in the analysis: 48 studies were level IV of evidence, whereas 19 were level III. All interbody fusion techniques analyzed have proved to reach a good fusion rate. An overall mean fusion rate of 93% (95% CI 92–95%, p < 0.001) was estimated pooling the selected studies. The influence of sagittal parameters and cages features in fusion rate was not clear. Autograft is considered the gold standard material. The use of synthetic bone substitutes and biological factors alone or combined with bone graft have shown conflicting results. Low level of evidence studies and high heterogeneity (χ² = 271.4, df = 72, p < 0.001; I² = 73.5%, τ² = 0.05) in data analysis could result in the risk of bias. Further high-quality studies would better clarify these results in the future.

Chun D, Baker K, Wellington K et al (2015) Lumbar pseudarthrosis: a review of current diagnosis and treatment. Neurosurg Focus 39(4):E10PubMed

Basso M, Cavagnaro L, Zanirato A et al (2017) What is the clinical evidence on regenerative medicine in intervertebral disc degeneration? Musculoskelet Surg 101(2):93–104PubMed

DePalma AF, Rothman RH (1968) The nature of pseudarthrosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 59:113–118PubMed

Carpenter CT, Dietz JW, Leung KY et al (1996) Repair of a pseudarthrosis of the lumbar spine. A functional outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78:712–720PubMed

Adogwa O, Verla T, Thompson P et al (2014) Affective disorders influence clinical outcomes after revision lumbar surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic adjacent-segment disease, recurrent stenosis, or pseudarthrosis: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 21:153–159PubMed

OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group*. The Oxford levels of evidence 2. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=5653. Accessed July 2019

Fujimori T, Le H, Schairer WW et al (2015) Does transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion have advantages over posterolateral lumbar fusion for degenerative spondylolisthesis? Glob Spine J 5:102–109

Høy K, Bünger C, Niederman B et al (2013) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) versus posterolateral instrumented fusion (PLF) in degenerative lumbar disorders: a randomized clinical trial with 2-year follow-up. Eur Spine J 22:2022–2029PubMedPubMedCentral

Faundez AA, Schwender JD, Safriel Y et al (2009) Clinical and radiological outcome of anterior–posterior fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for symptomatic disc degeneration: a retrospective comparative study of 133 patients. Eur Spine J 18:203–211PubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Lee N, Kim K, Yi S et al (2017) Comparison of Outcomes of anterior, posterior, and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery at a single lumbar level with degenerative spinal disease. World Neurosurg 101:216–226PubMed

11.

Malham GM, Parker R, Blecher C et al (2016) Choice of approach does not affect clinical and radiologic outcomes: a comparative cohort of patients having anterior lumbar interbody fusion and patients having lateral lumbar interbody fusion at 24 months. Glob Spine J 6:472–481

12.

Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson JR et al (2010) Fusion after minimally disruptive anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Analysis of extreme lateral interbody fusion by computed tomography. SAS J 4:63–66PubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Marchi L, Oliveira L, Amaral R, Castro C et al (2012) Lateral interbody fusion for treatment of discogenic low back pain: minimally invasive surgical techniques. Adv Orthop 2012:282068PubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Ozgur BM, Agarwal V, Nail E et al (2010) Two-year clinical and radiographic success of minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach for the treatment of degenerative lumbar conditions. SAS J 4:41–46PubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Malham GM, Ellis NJ, Parker RM et al (2012) Clinical outcome and fusion rates after the first 30 extreme lateral interbody fusions. ScientificWorldJournal 2012:246989PubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Berjano P, Langella F, Damilano M et al (2015) Fusion rate following extreme lateral lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 3):369–371PubMed

17.

Formica M, Berjano P, Cavagnaro L et al (2014) Extreme lateral approach to the spine in degenerative and post traumatic lumbar diseases: selection process, results and complications. Eur Spine J 23(Suppl 6):684–692PubMed

18.

Norotte G, Barrios C (2018) Clinical and radiological outcomes after stand-alone ALIF for single L5-S1 degenerative discopathy using a PEEK cage filled with hydroxyapatite nanoparticles without bone graft. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 168:24–29PubMed

19.

Song D, Tang M, Li C et al (2018) Double-level isthmic spondylolisthesis treated with posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cage. Br J Neurosurg 23:1–5

20.

Massie LW, Zakaria HM, Schultz LR et al (2018) Assessment of radiographic and clinical outcomes of an articulating expandable interbody cage in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for spondylolisthesis. Neurosurg Focus 44(1):E8PubMed

21.

Lee DD, Kim JY et al (2017) A comparison of radiographic and clinical outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion performed with either a cellular bone allograft containing multipotent adult progenitor cells or recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. J Orthop Surg Res 12(1):126PubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Seo DK, Kim MJ, Roh SW et al (2017) Morphological analysis of interbody fusion following posterior lumbar interbody fusion with cages using computed tomography. Medicine (Baltimore) 96(34):e7816

23.

Khan TR, Pearce KR, McAnany SJ et al (2018) Comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion outcomes in patients receiving rhBMP-2 versus autograft. Spine J 18(3):439–446PubMed

24.

Lee CW, Yoon KJ, Ha SS et al (2017) Which approach is advantageous to preventing development of adjacent segment disease? Comparative analysis of 3 different lumbar interbody fusion techniques (ALIF, LLIF, and PLIF) in L4-5 spondylolisthesis. World Neurosurg 105:612–622PubMed

25.

Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Assem Y et al (2016) Combination Ti/PEEK ALIF cage for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: early clinical and radiological results. J Clin Neurosci 34:94–99PubMed

26.

Saville PA, Kadam AB, Smith HE et al (2016) Anterior hyperlordotic cages: early experience and radiographic results. J Neurosurg Spine 25(6):713–719PubMed

27.

Witoon N, Tangviriyapaiboon T et al (2014) Clinical and radiological outcomes of segmental spinal fusion in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with spinous process tricortical autograft. Asian Spine J 8(2):170–176PubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Alimi M, Hofstetter CP, Cong GT et al (2014) Radiological and clinical outcomes following extreme lateral interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 20(6):623–635PubMed

29.

Lee YS, Kim YB, Park SW et al (2014) Comparison of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with direct lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiological results. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 56(6):469–474PubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Hironaka Y, Morimoto T, Motoyama Y et al (2013) Surgical management of minimally invasive anterior lumbar interbody fusion with stand-alone interbody cage for L4-5 degenerative disorders: clinical and radiographic findings. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 53(12):861–869

31.

Bin Abd Razak HR, Dhoke P, Tay KS et al (2017) Single-level minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion provides sustained improvements in clinical and radiological outcomes up to 5 years postoperatively in patients with neurogenic symptoms secondary to spondylolisthesis. Asian Spine J 11(2):204–212PubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Giorgi H, Prébet R, Delhaye M, French Society of Spine Surgery (SFCR) et al (2015) Minimally invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: one-year postoperative morbidity, clinical and radiological results of a prospective multicenter study of 182 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 101(6):S241–S245PubMed

33.

Asazuma T, Masuoka K, Motosuneya T et al (2005) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using dense hydroxyapatite blocks and autogenous iliac bone: clinical and radiographic examinations. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(Suppl):S41–S47PubMed

34.

Burkus JK, Dorchak JD, Sanders DL et al (2003) Radiographic assessment of interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(4):372–377

35.

Cheung KM, Zhang YG, Lu DS et al (2003) Reduction of disc space distraction after anterior lumbar interbody fusion with autologous iliac crest graft. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(13):1385–1389

36.

Carter JD, Swearingen AB, Chaput CD et al (2009) Clinical and radiographic assessment of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using HEALOS collagen-hydroxyapatite sponge with autologous bone marrow aspirate. Spine J 9(6):434–438PubMed

37.

Cutler AR, Siddiqui S, Mohan AL et al (2006) Comparison of polyetheretherketone cages with femoral cortical bone allograft as a single-piece interbody spacer in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 5(6):534–539PubMed

38.

El Masry MA, Badawy WS, Rajendran P et al (2004) Combined anterior interbody fusion and posterior pedicle screw fixation in patients with degenerative lumbar disc disease. Int Orthop 28(5):294–297PubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Fogel GR, Toohey JS, Neidre A et al (2007) Is one cage enough in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a comparison of unilateral single cage interbody fusion to bilateral cages. J Spinal Disord Tech 20(1):60–65PubMed

40.

Hackenberg L, Halm H, Bullmann V et al (2005) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a safe technique with satisfactory three to five year results. Eur Spine J 14(6):551–558PubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Haid RW Jr, Branch CL Jr, Alexander JT et al (2004) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein type 2 with cylindrical interbody cages. Spine J 4(5):527–538 (discussion 538-9) PubMed

42.

Huang KF, Chen TY (2003) Clinical results of a single central interbody fusion cage and transpedicle screws fixation for recurrent herniated lumbar disc and low-grade spondylolisthesis. Chang Gung Med J 26(3):170–177PubMed

43.

Ito Z, Imagama S, Kanemura T et al (2013) Bone union rate with autologous iliac bone versus local bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF): a multicenter study. Eur Spine J 22(5):1158–1163PubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Kai Y, Oyama M, Morooka M et al (2004) Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using local facet joint autograft and pedicle screw fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(1):41–46

45.

Ito Z, Matsuyama Y, Sakai Y et al (2010) Bone union rate with autologous iliac bone versus local bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(21):E1101–E1105

46.

Kalb S, Perez-Orribo L, Kalani MY et al (2016) The influence of common medical conditions on the outcome of anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Spine Surg 29(7):285–290PubMed

47.

Kim H, Lee CK, Yeom JS et al (2012) The efficacy of porous hydroxyapatite bone chip as an extender of local bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 21(7):1324–1330PubMed

48.

Kim JS, Jung B, Lee SH et al (2018) Instrumented minimally invasive spinal-transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF); minimum 5-years follow-up with clinical and radiologic outcomes. J Spinal Disord Tech 31(6):E302–E309

49.

Jenis LG, Banco RJ, Kwon B et al (2006) A prospective study of Autologous Growth Factors (AGF) in lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 6(1):14–20PubMed

50.

Kim JW, Park HC, Yoon SH et al (2007) A multi-center clinical study of posterior lumbar interbody fusion with the expandable stand-alone cage (Tyche(R) Cage) for degenerative lumbar spinal disorders. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 42(4):251–257PubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Kim MC, Chung HT, Kim DJ, Kim SH, Jeon SH (2011) The clinical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody single level fusion. Asian Spine J 5(2):111–116PubMedPubMedCentral

52.

Lee JH, Jeon DW, Lee SJ et al (2010) Fusion rates and subsidence of morselized local bone grafted in titanium cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion using quantitative three-dimensional computed tomography scans. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(15):1460–1465

53.

Lee JH, Lee JH, Park JW et al (2011) Fusion rates of a morselized local bone graft in polyetheretherketone cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion by quantitative analysis using consecutive three-dimensional computed tomography scans. Spine J 11(7):647–653PubMed

54.

Madan SS, Boeree NR et al (2003) Comparison of instrumented anterior interbody fusion with instrumented circumferential lumbar fusion. Eur Spine J 12(6):567–575PubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Miura Y, Imagama S, Yoda M et al (2003) Is local bone viable as a source of bone graft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(20):2386–2389

56.

Mofidi A, Sedhom M, O’Shea K et al (2005) Is high level of disability an indication for spinal fusion? Analysis of long-term outcome after posterior lumbar interbody fusion using carbon fiber cages. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(6):479–484PubMed

57.

Nakashima H, Yukawa Y, Ito K et al (2011) Extension CT scan: its suitability for assessing fusion after posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 20(9):1496–1502PubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Okuyama K, Kido T, Unoki E et al (2007) PLIF with a titanium cage and excised facet joint bone for degenerative spondylolisthesis in augmentation with a pedicle screw. J Spinal Disord Tech 220(1):53–59

59.

Park JH, Roh SW (2011) Long-term clinical and radiological outcomes following stand-alone PLIF surgery using expandable cylindrical threaded cages in patients with degenerative lumbar spine disease. Acta Neurochir 153(7):1409–1416PubMed

60.

Pavlov PW, Meijers H, van Limbeek J et al (2004) Good outcome and restoration of lordosis after anterior lumbar interbody fusion with additional posterior fixation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(17):1893–1899 (discussion 1900)

61.

Potter BK, Freedman BA, Verwiebe EG et al (2005) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: clinical and radiographic results and complications in 100 consecutive patients. J Spinal Disord Tech. 18(4):337–346PubMed

62.

Rouben D, Casnellie M, Ferguson M (2011) Long-term durability of minimal invasive posterior transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic follow-up. J Spinal Disord Tech. 24(5):288–296PubMed

63.

Santos ER, Goss DG, Morcom RK et al (2003) Radiologic assessment of interbody fusion using carbon fiber cages. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28(10):997–1001

64.

Schiffman M, Brau SA, Henderson R et al (2003) Bilateral implantation of low-profile interbody fusion cages: subsidence, lordosis, and fusion analysis. Spine J 3(5):377–387PubMed

65.

Thaler M, Lechner R, Gstöttner M et al (2013) The use of beta-tricalcium phosphate and bone marrow aspirate as a bone graft substitute in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 22(5):1173–1182PubMed

66.

Thalgott JS, Klezl Z, Timlin M et al (2002) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with processed sea coral (coralline hydroxyapatite) as part of a circumferential fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27(24):E518–E525 (discussion E526-7)

67.

Thalgott JS, Giuffre JM, Klezl Z et al (2002) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion with titanium mesh cages, coralline hydroxyapatite, and demineralized bone matrix as part of a circumferential fusion. Spine J 2(1):63–69PubMed

68.

Rihn JA, Makda J, Hong J et al (2009) The use of RhBMP-2 in single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiographic analysis. Eur Spine J 18(11):1629–1636PubMedPubMedCentral

69.

Xiao Y, Li F, Chen Q (2010) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with one cage and excised local bone. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130(5):591–597PubMed

70.

Zhang YF, Yang HL, Wang JW et al (2009) Two-year follow-up results after treatment of lumbar instability with titanium-coated fusion system. Orthop Surg 1(2):94–100PubMedPubMedCentral

71.

Xue H, Tu Y, Cai M (2012) Comparison of unilateral versus bilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in degenerative lumbar diseases. Spine J 12(3):209–215PubMed

72.

Zairi F, Arikat A, Allaoui M et al (2013) Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: comparison between open and mini-open approaches with two years follow-up. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 74(3):131–135PubMed

73.

Ould-Slimane M, Lenoir T, Dauzac C et al (2012) Influence of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures on spinal and pelvic parameters of sagittal balance. Eur Spine J 21(6):1200–1206PubMed

74.

Okuyama K, Abe E, Suzuki T et al (2001) Influence of bone mineral density on pedicle screw fixation: a study of pedicle screw fixation augmenting posterior lumbar interbody fusion in elderly patients. Spine J1:402–407

75.

Choudhri TF, Mummaneni PV, Dhall SS et al (2014) Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 4: radiographic assessment of fusion status. J Neurosurg Spine 21:23–30PubMed

76.

Bach K, Ahmadian A, Deukmedjian A et al (2014) Minimally invasive surgical techniques in adult degenerative spinal deformity: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(6):1749–1761PubMedPubMedCentral

77.

Uribe JS, Smith DA, Dakwar E et al (2012) Lordosis restoration after anterior longitudinal ligament release and placement of lateral hyperlordotic interbody cages during the minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach: a radiographic study in cadavers. J Neurosurg Spine 17(5):476–485PubMed

78.

Formica M, Zanirato A, Cavagnaro L et al (2017) Extreme lateral interbody fusion in spinal revision surgery: clinical results and complications. Eur Spine J 26(suppl 4):464–470PubMed

79.

Formica M, Cavagnaro L, Basso M, Zanirato A, Felli L, Formica C (2015) Is it possible to preserve lumbar lordosis after hybrid stabilization? Preliminary results of a novel rigid–dynamic stabilization system in degenerative lumbar pathologies. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 7):S849–S854

80.

Formica M, Divano S, Cavagnaro L et al (2017) Lumbar total disc arthroplasty: outdated surgery or here to stay procedure? A systematic review of current literature. J Orthop Traumatol 18(3):197–215PubMedPubMedCentral

81.

Hsieh PC, Koski TR, O’Shaughnessy BA et al (2007) Anterior lumbar interbody fusion in comparison with transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: implications for the restoration of foraminal height, local disc angle, lumbar lordosis, and sagittal balance. J Neurosurg Spine 7:379–386PubMed

82.

Hsu WK, Nickoli MS, Wang JC et al (2012) Improving the clinical evidence of bone graft substitute technology in lumbar spine surgery. Global Spine J 2:239–248PubMedPubMedCentral

83.

Gologorsky Y, Skovrlj B, Steinberger J et al (2014) Increased incidence of pseudarthrosis after unilateral instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in patients with lumbar spondylosis. J Neurosurg Spine 21:601–607PubMed

84.

Marengo N, Ajello M, Pecoraro MF et al (2018) Cortical bone trajectory screws in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: minimally invasive surgery for maximal muscle sparing—a prospective comparative study with the traditional open technique. Biomed Res Int 2018:7424568PubMedPubMedCentral

85.

Ailon T, Hamilton K, Klineberg E et al (2018) Radiographic fusion grade does not impact health related quality of life in the absence of instrumentation failure for patients undergoing posterior instrumented fusion for adult spinal deformity. World Neurosurg 117:e1–e7PubMed

86.

Andersen T, Christensen FB, Laursen M et al (2001) Smoking as a predictor of negative outcome in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2623–2628

87.

Macki M, Syeda S, Rajjoub KR et al (2017) The effect of smoking status on successful arthrodesis after lumbar instrumentation supplemented with rhBMP-2. World Neurosurg 97:459–464PubMed

88.

Glassman SD, Alegre G, Carreon L et al (2003) Perioperative complications of lumbar instrumentation and fusion in patients with diabetes mellitus. Spine J 3:496–501PubMed

89.

Inose H, Yamada T, Mulati M et al (2018) Bone turnover markers as a new predicting factor for nonunion after spinal fusion surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 43(1):E29–E34

90.

Chin DK, Park JY, Yoon YS et al (2007) Prevalence of osteoporosis in patients requiring spine surgery: incidence and significance of osteoporosis in spine disease. Osteoporos Int 18(9):1219–1224PubMed

91.

92.

Chen F, Dai Z, Kang Y et al (2016) Effects of zoledronic acid on bone fusion in osteoporotic patients after lumbar fusion. Osteoporos Int 27(4):1469–1476PubMed

93.

Ebata S, Takahashi J, Hasegawa T et al (2017) Role of weekly teriparatide administration in osseous union enhancement within six months after posterior or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for osteoporosis-associated lumbar degenerative disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:365–372PubMed

Titel: Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review
verfasst von: M. Formica
D. Vallerga
A. Zanirato
L. Cavagnaro
M. Basso
S. Divano
L. Mosconi
E. Quarto
G. Siri
L. Felli
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2020
Verlag: Springer Milan
Erschienen in: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY / Ausgabe 1/2020
Print ISSN: 2035-5106
Elektronische ISSN: 2035-5114
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-019-00634-x

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Fusion rate and influence of surgery-related factors in lumbar interbody arthrodesis for degenerative spine diseases: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Abstract

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

„Übersichtlicher Wegweiser“: Lauterbachs umstrittener Klinik-Atlas ist online

Klinikreform soll zehntausende Menschenleben retten

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Failure rates and functional results for intercalary femur reconstructions after tumour resection

The kringle suture: maximizing tendon repair stability while limiting hardware utilization—description of the technique and preliminary results

Biomechanical comparison of the three techniques for arthroscopic suprapectoral biceps tenodesis: implant-free intraosseous tendon fixation with Cobra Guide, interference screw and suture anchor

Ultrastructural and histological changes in tibial remnant of ruptured anterior cruciate ligament stumps: a transmission electron microscopy and immunochemistry-based observational study

Arthroscopic release for the severely stiff elbow

Subjective outcome following neurostimulator implantation as drop foot therapy due to lesions in the central nervous system—midterm results

Arthropedia

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Mehr Frauen im OP – weniger postoperative Komplikationen

„Übersichtlicher Wegweiser“: Lauterbachs umstrittener Klinik-Atlas ist online

Klinikreform soll zehntausende Menschenleben retten

TEP mit Roboterhilfe führt nicht zu größerer Zufriedenheit

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie