Blog
About

1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty : implants and surgical approaches

      Current Orthopaedic Practice

      Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Pyrolytic Carbon Resurfacing Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint of the Finger

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Osseointegration and mechanical stability of pyrocarbon and titanium hand implants in a load-bearing in vivo model for small joint arthroplasty.

            To test the mechanical stability and histologic osseointegration under load-bearing conditions of 2 different materials, pyrocarbon (Py) and titanium (Ti), in a rabbit model.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Palmar approach in flexible implant arthroplasty of the proximal interphalangeal joint.

               D B Herren,  B Simmen (2000)
              Joint replacement is an established method in the treatment of destroyed, painful, proximal interphalangeal joints. A palmar approach was used in which the main collateral ligaments were preserved, allowing immediate active rehabilitation with enhanced primary lateral stability. Fifty-nine proximal interphalangeal joint silicone arthroplasties in 38 patients with a minimum followup of 12 months were reviewed. Thirty-eight of the 59 joints had implantation from a palmar approach and 21 joints from a dorsal approach. The two groups were well-matched in terms of indication, preoperative range of motion, and patient age. No significant increase in the range of motion was found in either of the patient groups, with an overall average range of motion of 51 degrees postoperatively. There was also no significant difference in the postoperative stability in the two patient groups. The choice of surgical approach at the proximal interphalangeal joint level for the silastic type of implants does not appear to be important. With more sophisticated types of implants in which the integrity of the collateral ligaments is crucial, a palmar approach might be beneficial.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Current Orthopaedic Practice
                Current Orthopaedic Practice
                Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
                1940-7041
                2014
                2014
                : 25
                : 5
                : 415-419
                Article
                10.1097/BCO.0000000000000149
                © 2014

                Comments

                Comment on this article