Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1992369987> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 72 of
72
with 100 items per page.
- W1992369987 endingPage "682" @default.
- W1992369987 startingPage "681" @default.
- W1992369987 abstract "We thank Mr. Diamond and Mr. McAlinden for their interest in our article [1]. We agree that a comparison of the two stems might be of interest, but only at first glance. During the study we learned that a direct comparison of the DEXA results of the two stems would lead to a misunderstanding of the implants. The Bicontact stem (BBraun, Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) is a straight, standard stem which is implanted in an older population when compared to the Metha stem. Both stems follow a different femoral loading philosophy. Deeper resection for the Bicontact straight stem and the greater diaphyseal loading, with a larger proximal plasma sprayed surface leads to stabilisation in the intertrochanteric area [2, 3]. The Metha stem (BBraun, Aesculap, Tuttlingen, Germany) is not filling, a closed cortical ring of the femoral neck, bears some weight and due to the geometry of the implant follows the femoral neck during implantation and has a varus loading on the calcar (Fig. 1). Furthermore, the Gruen zones for the DEXA scans differ enormously. Most of the zones that have to be set for one implant involve completely different regions of the femur when compared to the other. The regions also have different sizes. Therefore a statistically valid comparison is not possible in our opinion and the reader will simply obtain false information. A direct comparison of the implants might lead the reader to the wrong assumption that one implant is better than the other, though each implant has its own indication. Numerous quite similar short stems have been introduced recently. We strongly believe that we need to compare these stems to investigate whether the minor differences between the implants have an impact on periprosthetic bone remodelling. However, we conducted the study exactly as displayed on the Controlled-Trials website including the Bicontact branch. We will report on these results shortly.Fig. 1The Metha short stem (a) compared to the Bicontact straight stem (b). Both implants differ in terms of loading area and direction (yellow lines), resection height (black lines) and size" @default.
- W1992369987 created "2016-06-24" @default.
- W1992369987 creator A5083088480 @default.
- W1992369987 creator A5083321893 @default.
- W1992369987 date "2011-12-17" @default.
- W1992369987 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
- W1992369987 title "Reply to comments on the article: Bone remodelling around the Metha short stem in total hip arthroplasty: a prospective dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry study" @default.
- W1992369987 cites W1964528259 @default.
- W1992369987 cites W1990484388 @default.
- W1992369987 cites W2033840751 @default.
- W1992369987 doi "https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1457-6" @default.
- W1992369987 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3291779" @default.
- W1992369987 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
- W1992369987 type Work @default.
- W1992369987 sameAs 1992369987 @default.
- W1992369987 citedByCount "1" @default.
- W1992369987 countsByYear W19923699872015 @default.
- W1992369987 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
- W1992369987 hasAuthorship W1992369987A5083088480 @default.
- W1992369987 hasAuthorship W1992369987A5083321893 @default.
- W1992369987 hasBestOaLocation W19923699872 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C170033053 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C1862650 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C188816634 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C2776541429 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C2776886416 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C2778336525 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C2781440623 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C2994545362 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C3019025420 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C3020736514 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C68312169 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C126322002 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C141071460 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C170033053 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C1862650 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C188816634 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C2776541429 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C2776886416 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C2778336525 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C2781440623 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C2994545362 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C3019025420 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C3020736514 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C68312169 @default.
- W1992369987 hasConceptScore W1992369987C71924100 @default.
- W1992369987 hasIssue "3" @default.
- W1992369987 hasLocation W19923699871 @default.
- W1992369987 hasLocation W19923699872 @default.
- W1992369987 hasLocation W19923699873 @default.
- W1992369987 hasOpenAccess W1992369987 @default.
- W1992369987 hasPrimaryLocation W19923699871 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W1968264319 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2041598040 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2063698460 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2170543956 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2355479703 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2418045785 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2464542965 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W4233444637 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W4318443888 @default.
- W1992369987 hasRelatedWork W2563153570 @default.
- W1992369987 hasVolume "36" @default.
- W1992369987 isParatext "false" @default.
- W1992369987 isRetracted "false" @default.
- W1992369987 magId "1992369987" @default.
- W1992369987 workType "article" @default.