Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by A Prkić in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by N P Vermeulen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Unit, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Medische Kliniek Velsen, Velsen-Noord, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by B W Kooistra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by B The in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by M P J van den Bekerom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by D Eygendaal in
Google Scholar
PubMed
[Internet]. Available at: http://www.lroi-rapportage.nl/ 2. Prkic A van Bergen CJA The B Eygendaal D . Total elbow arthroplasty is moving forward: review on past, present and future . World Journal of Orthopedics 2016 7 44– 49 . ( https
Search for other papers by Huub H. de Klerk in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Chantal L. Welsink in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Anne J. Spaans in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Lukas P. E. Verweij in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Michel P. J. van den Bekerom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Introduction Degenerative joint disease of the elbow is less common compared to the hip and knee. The prevalence of primary elbow osteoarthritis (OA) is 2–3%. 1 , 2 OA of the elbow can cause severe disabling symptoms of pain, locking
Search for other papers by Stephen Gates in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Brain Sager in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Michael Khazzam in
Google Scholar
PubMed
arthroplasty assessment, and found that MRI and CT were comparable for glenoid version measurements with less severe deformity types. 13 However, MRI significantly under identified type B2 and over identified type C glenoid deformities when compared with
Search for other papers by Alexandre Lädermann in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Stephen S. Burkhart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Pierre Hoffmeyer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Lionel Neyton in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Philippe Collin in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Evan Yates in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Patrick J. Denard in
Google Scholar
PubMed
/nonunion Tuberosity insufficiency 27 (7.3%) Greater tuberosity 12 (3.2%) Lesser tuberosity 4 (1.1%) 5 (1.3%) 6 (1.6%) Full-thickness tendon lesion B1 B2 B3 B4 Avulsion of tendinous attachments Midsubstance tear Fosbury flop tear Bony adhesions 334 (90
Search for other papers by Alp Paksoy in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Doruk Akgün in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sebastian Lappen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Philipp Moroder in
Google Scholar
PubMed
other hand, type B2 describes instability caused by structural damages such as posterior Bankart lesion, posterior glenoid bone loss, RHSL, or a combination hereof due to a single trauma or recurrent microtrauma. These structural defects of the humeral
Search for other papers by Joost I.P. Willems in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jim Hoffmann in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Xpert Orthopedics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Inger N. Sierevelt in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Michel P.J. van den Bekerom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tjarco D.W. Alta in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Arthur van Noort in
Google Scholar
PubMed
: Case series or comparative studies, both prospective and retrospective, (1) published in peer reviewed journals (2) reporting on outcomes of uncemented stemless hemi-, total or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (HA, TSA, RSA), (3) with a minimum follow
Search for other papers by Maciej Otworowski in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Dariusz Grzelecki in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Krzysztof Starszak in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Andrzej Boszczyk in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mateusz Piorunek in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Trauma and Orthopedics Department, Centre of Posgraduate Medical Education, Otwock, Poland
Search for other papers by Bartłomiej Kordasiewicz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
shoulder fractures ( Fig. 2 , 3 , 4, and 5 ). Figure 2 Wright and Cofield classification. It divides periprosthetic fractures into three types. Type A – fracture located near the tip of the stem. Extending proximally. Type B – fracture located
These authors contributed equally to this work
Search for other papers by Heri Suroto in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Cell & Tissue Bank-Regenerative Medicine Centre, Dr. Soetomo General Academic Hospital, Surabaya, Indonesia
These authors contributed equally to this work
Search for other papers by Brigita De Vega in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Fani Deapsari in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tabita Prajasari in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Pramono Ari Wibowo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Steven K. Samijo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
( Fig. 2a ). 23 Whereas, five non-RCT studies were assessed using ROBINS-I ( Fig. 2b ), of which four studies indicated a moderate risk of bias, 25 – 28 and one study had a high risk of bias 24 due to confounding. The distinct age gap was determined
Search for other papers by Pududu Archie Rachuene in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Human Biology, Division of Biomedical Engineering, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Search for other papers by Roopam Dey in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Human Biology, Division of Biomedical Engineering, University of Cape Town, South Africa
Search for other papers by Sudesh Sivarasu in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jean-Pierre du Plessis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Stephen Roche in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Basil Vrettos in
Google Scholar
PubMed
) ( 15 ). Type A glenoids are characterised by concentric glenoid wear with the humeral head centred. Humeral head subluxation associated with posterior glenoid wear is characteristic of type B glenoid. The new modification redefined A-2 glenoids as a
Rehasport Clinic, Poznań, Poland
Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Hand Surgery, University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland
Search for other papers by Przemysław Lubiatowski in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Rehasport Clinic, Poznań, Poland
Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Hand Surgery, University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland
Search for other papers by Joanna Wałecka in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Marcin Dzianach in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Rehasport Clinic, Poznań, Poland
Department of Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Hand Surgery, University of Medical Sciences, Poznań, Poland
Search for other papers by Jakub Stefaniak in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Leszek Romanowski in
Google Scholar
PubMed
ligament. Note . AF, anterior fold; LF, lateral fold; PF, posterior fold; LOF, lateral olecranon fold. Fig. 2 Anatomic pictures of a posterior fold cushioning a radio-capitellar joint at flexion (a) and extension (b). Fig. 3