Search for other papers by M M Morlock in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by E Gomez-Barrena in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by D C Wirtz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by A Hart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by J P Kretzer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
from Class IIb to III (2005/50/EC) in the European Union, with a transition period between 2007 and 2009. Today, revisions due to implant failure are not clearly reflected in the joint arthroplasty registries due to their small number. Revision
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
provides adequate reduction of the anterior pelvic ring and narrows the partially widened sacroiliac joint until the ligamentous injuries have healed. Surgeons who prefer the combined technique often fear implant failure or malunion and consider isolated SP
Search for other papers by Demien Broekhuis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rutger Tordoir in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Zoe Vallinga in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jan Schoones in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Bart Pijls in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rob Nelissen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
, implant failure and functional outcomes. The secondary aim was to evaluate the predictors of outcome for CTAC surgical techniques and implant characteristics. Methods The reporting of this systematic review is in accordance with the PRISMA 2020
Search for other papers by Thorsten Gehrke in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mustafa Citak in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mustafa Akkaya in
Google Scholar
PubMed
and implant failures. Through the integration of advanced imaging technologies, computational modeling, and additive fabrication methods, megaimplants lead to optimal implant stability, restored hip biomechanics, and better patient outcomes. On the
Search for other papers by Victor Lu in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Maria Tennyson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Andrew Zhou in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ravi Patel in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mary D Fortune in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Azeem Thahir in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Matija Krkovic in
Google Scholar
PubMed
pooled proportion of 8% (95% CI: 0.06–0.11, I 2 = 0%) ( Fig. 3C ). Implant failure was reported in 11 and had a pooled proportion of 11% (95% CI: 0.07–0.15, I 2 = 0%) ( Fig. 3D ). Implant failure was defined as broken/loose screws, nail breakages, or
Search for other papers by Alexei Buruian in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Francisco Silva Gomes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tiago Roseiro in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Claudia Vale in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by André Carvalho in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Emanuel Seiça in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Antonio Mendes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Carlos Pereira in
Google Scholar
PubMed
, including implant failure (0.2%), screw loosening and breaking, drill bit breaking (0.4%), soft tissue irritation, intramuscular haematoma and compartment syndrome. 10 , 40 , 44 , 45 , 46 Higher radiation exposure for the surgical team is also a factor
Search for other papers by Sebastian Siebenlist in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Arne Buchholz in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Karl F. Braun in
Google Scholar
PubMed
last decade. 65 , 66 , 70 Complications such as ulnar neuropathy, deep infection, implant failure or delayed/non-union are relatively rarely reported. However, an uneven reconstruction of the articular surface can cause sequelae such as limited
Search for other papers by Fahima A. Begum in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Babar Kayani in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Samuel D. J. Morgan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Syed S. Ahmed in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sandeep Singh in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Fares S. Haddad in
Google Scholar
PubMed
reasons for implant failure and early revision surgery in UKA. 5 – 7 To help overcome this, there has been a recent surge in robotic UKA. This procedure uses computer technology to preoperatively plan optimal bone resection and implant positioning
Search for other papers by Dongmei Wu in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rohan M Bhalekar in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jordan S Marsh in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by David J Langton in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Alan J Stewart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
in blood ( 79 , 80 ). It is reported to be a rare complication with a prevalence of around 5% in MoM hip replacements ( 79 ). However, it cannot be used as a diagnostic terminology to define implant failure as it fails to distinguish the complexity
Academic Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, LGI, University of Leeds, UK
Search for other papers by Emmanuele Santolini in
Google Scholar
PubMed
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
associated with anterior pelvic ring injuries, in order to increase stability and reduce the risk of posterior implant failure. They include retrograde transpubic screw, anterior internal fixator, or plate and screws. 17 , 82 Overall, indications and
