Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
Search for other papers by David González-Martín in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
Search for other papers by José Luis Pais-Brito in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sergio González-Casamayor in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ayron Guerra-Ferraz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
Search for other papers by Jorge Ojeda-Jiménez in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Universidad de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
Search for other papers by Mario Herrera-Pérez in
Google Scholar
PubMed
prosthesis or immediately distal to it. There are three subtypes: B1 (stable stem), B2 (unstable or loose stem with good surrounding bone stock quality), and B3 (unstable or loose stem with inadequate surrounding bone stock). Type C fractures are distal to
TraumaEvidence @ German Society for Trauma Surgery, Berlin, Germany
Search for other papers by Martin C Jordan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Konrad F Fuchs in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Steven C Herath in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
Search for other papers by Joachim Windolf in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rainer H Meffert in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Düsseldorf, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
Search for other papers by Anne Neubert in
Google Scholar
PubMed
anterior sacroiliac ligaments (APC II or B2.3d). The intervention included stabilizing the pubic symphysis using a symphyseal plate and stabilizing the sacroiliac joint using an SI screw. Patients who had been treated with anterior plate fixation alone
Search for other papers by Nikolaos Patsiogiannis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
NIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Center, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, UK
Search for other papers by Nikolaos K. Kanakaris in
Google Scholar
PubMed
NIHR Leeds Biomedical Research Center, Chapel Allerton Hospital, Leeds, UK
Search for other papers by Peter V. Giannoudis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
based on the stability of the implant and the quality of the surrounding bone. Fig. 1 The Vancouver classification: AG, greater trochanter fracture; AL, lesser trochanter fracture: B1, fracture around the tip of prosthesis-stable implant; B2
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Spine Unit, Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal (CHUM), Canada.
Search for other papers by Amer Sebaaly in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Maroun Rizkallah in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Guillaume Riouallon in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Zhi Wang in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Pierre Emmanuel Moreau in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Falah Bachour in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ghassan Maalouf in
Google Scholar
PubMed
fixation with open reduction and fusion in patients with type A (according to AO classification 57 ) fractures where the fracture is inherently stable. Type B fractures, especially B2, where ligamentous instability is present, leads to a weak scar
Search for other papers by Karl Stoffel in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tamara Horn in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Michael Mueller in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Carsten Perka in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Henrik Eckardt in
Google Scholar
PubMed
treated surgically (with or without open reduction internal fixation, ORIF); although non-operative measures are also used. 16 , 17 In general, it is accepted that Vancouver B1 fractures can be treated with ORIF, and some newer studies on Vancouver B2
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 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 Ashoklal Ramavath in
Google Scholar
PubMed
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Search for other papers by Jonathan N. Lamb in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jeya Palan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Search for other papers by Hemant G. Pandit in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sameer Jain in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Example A Involving apophysis e.g. avulsion Greater or lesser trochanter B Directly adjacent to implant Femoral shaft fracture around stem B1 Well-fixed implant B2 Loose implant and good bone stock B3
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
Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
Search for other papers by Peter van Schie in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Shaho Hasan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Leti van Bodegom-Vos in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jan W Schoones in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rob G H H Nelissen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Perla J Marang-van de Mheen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-hospital variation for revision. Revision Studies ( n = 6) Registry reports ( n = 8) THA ( n = 5) (4,15,20,25,31) TKA ( n = 4) (4,8,25,31) THA ( n = 13) (A 1 ,A 2 ,B 1 ,B 2 ,D 1 ,D 2 ,D 3 ,E 1 ,E 2 ,G 1 ,G 2 ,G 3 ,H) TKA ( n = 13