Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Relative Merits of Cemented and Uncemented Prostheses in Total Hip Arthroplasty

  • Symposium - Total Hip Arthroplasty
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The results of modern cemented and uncemented total hip arthroplasties are outstanding and both systems have their advantages and disadvantages. This paper aims to examine the designs of different types of prostheses, some history behind their development and the reported results. Particular emphasis is placed on cemented stem design and the details of cementing technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thanner J. The acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty. Evaluation of different fixation principles. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1999;286:1–41.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Davies N, Jackson W, Price A, Rees J, Lavy C. FRCS Trauma and Orthopaedics Viva. Oxford, Oxford University Press; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Khanuja HS, Vakil JJ, Goddard MS, Mont MA. Cementless femoral fixation in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:500–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Castelli CC, Rizzi L. Short stems in total hip replacement: Current status and future. Hip Int 2014;24 Suppl 10:S25–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Galante J, Rostoker W, Lueck R, Ray RD. Sintered fiber metal composites as a basis for attachment of implants to bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1971;53:101–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Zweymüller KA, Lintner FK, Semlitsch MF. Biologic fixation of a press-fit titanium hip joint endoprosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;(235): 195–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Engh CA, O’Connor D, Jasty M, McGovern TF, Bobyn JD, Harris WH. Quantification of implant micromotion, strain shielding, and bone resorption with porous-coated anatomic medullary locking femoral prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992;(285): 13–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Pilliar RM, Lee JM, Maniatopoulos C. Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1986;208:108–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jasty M, Bragdon C, Burke D, O’Connor D, Lowenstein J, Harris WH. In vivo skeletal responses to porous-surfaced implants subjected to small induced motions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997;79:707–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mirza SB, Dunlop DG, Panesar SS, Naqvi SG, Gangoo S, Salih S. Basic science considerations in primary total hip replacement arthroplasty. Open Orthop J 2010;4:169–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Cook SD, Thomas KA, Haddad RJ Jr. Histologic analysis of retrieved human porous-coated total joint components. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;(234):90–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Spector M. Historical review of porous-coated implants. J Arthroplasty 1987;2:163–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Berry DJ. Primary total hip arthroplasty. In: Chapman MW, editor. Chapman’s Orthopaedic Surgery. Philadelphia: Lippincott: Williams and Wilkins; 2001. p. 2769–90.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Albrektsson T, Brånemark PI, Hansson HA, Lindström J. Osseointegrated titanium implants. Requirements for ensuring a long-lasting, direct bone-to-implant anchorage in man. Acta Orthop Scand 1981;52:155–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Haddad RJ Jr., Cook SD, Thomas KA. Biological fixation of porous-coated implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987;69:1459–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Abrahams TG, Crothers OD. Radiographic analysis of an investigational hydroxyapatite-coated total hip replacement. Invest Radiol 1992;27:779–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chambers B, St. Clair SF, Froimson MI. Hydroxyapatite-coated tapered cementless femoral components in total hip arthroplasty. I Arthroplasty 2007;22 4 Suppl 1:71–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Dorr LD, Wan Z, Song M, Ranawat A. Bilateral total hip arthroplasty comparing hydroxyapatite coating to porous-coated fixation. J Arthroplasty 1998;13:729–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Thanner J, Karrholm J, Herberts P, Malchau H. Porous cups with and without hydroxylapatite-tricalcium phosphate coating: 23 matched pairs evaluated with radiostereometry. J Arthroplasty 1999;14:266–71.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Rothman RH, Hozack WJ, Ranawat A, Moriarty L. Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stems. A matched-pair analysis of coated and uncoated implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1996;78:319–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Paulsen A, Pedersen AB, Johnsen SP, Riis A, Lucht U, Overgaard S. Effect of hydroxyapatite coating on risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty in younger patients: Findings from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop 2007;78:622–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Camazzola D, Hammond T, Gandhi R, Davey JR. A randomized trial of hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stems in total hip arthroplasty: A 13-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 2009;24:33–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Emerson RH Jr., Sanders SB, Head WC, Higgins L. Effect of circumferential plasma-spray porous coating on the rate of femoral osteolysis after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999;81:1291–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sinha RK, Dungy DS, Yeon HB. Primary total hip arthroplasty with a proximally porous-coated femoral stem. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86-A: 1254–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Urban RM, Jacobs JJ, Sumner DR, Peters CL, Voss FR, Galante JO. The bone-implant interface of femoral stems with non-circumferential porous coating. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1996;78:1068–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Eynon-Lewis NJ, Ferry D, Pearse MF. Themistocles Gluck: An unrecognised genius. BMJ 1992;305:1534–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Nottrott M. Acrylic bone cements: Influence of time and environment on physical properties. Acta Orthop Suppl 2010;81:1–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Arora M, Chan EK, Gupta S, Diwan AD. Polymethylmethacrylate bone cements and additives: A review of the literature. World J Orthop 2013;4:67–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Cabraja M, Klecan J, Phillips GO. Polymethyl methacrylate: An acceptable material for tissue augmentation and reconstruction. In: Phillips GO, editor. Legal Basis of Global Tissue Banking: A Proactive Clinical Perspective. New Jersey, London, Singapore, Beijing, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Chennai: World Scientific; 2016. p. 253–74.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Draenert K, Draenert Y, Garde U, Ulrich CH. Manual of Cementing Technique. Berlin. Berlin Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag; 1999.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  31. Haboush EJ. A new operation for arthroplasty of the hip based on biomechanics, photoelasticity, fast-setting dental acrylic, and other considerations. Bull Hosp Joint Dis 1953;14:242–77.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Peltier LF. Orthopaedics: History and Iconography. San Francisco: Norman Publishing; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Charnley J. Anchorage of the femoral head prosthesis to the shaft of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1960;42-B: 28–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gomez PF, Morcuende JA. A historical and economic perspective on Sir John Charnley, Chas F. Thackray Limited, and the early arthoplasty industry. Iowa Orthop J 2005;25:30–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Griffith MJ, Seidenstein MK, Williams D, Charnley J. Eight year results of Charnley arthroplasties of the hip with special reference to the behavior of cement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1978;137:24–36.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Yamada H, Yoshihara Y, Henmi O, Morita M, Shiromoto Y, Kawano T, et al. Cementless total hip replacement: Past, present, and future. J Orthop Sci 2009;14:228–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Vaishya R, Chauhan M, Vaish A. Bone cement. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2013;4:157–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Fenton P, Rampurada A, Quereshi F. USM Orthopaedic. Available from: https://www.usmorthopaedic.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/bone-cement-its-history-its-properties-and-developments-in-its-use/2009. [Last accessed on 2016 Dec 29].

  39. Fagan M, Ling RS. Principles of cemented implant fixation. In: Ling RS, Lee AJ, Gle GA, Timperley AJ, Hubble MJ, Howell JR, et al., editors. The Exeter Hip: 40 Year of Innovation in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Exeter, UK: Exeter Hip Publishing; 2010. p. 13–23.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Halawa M, Lee AJ, Ling RS, Vangala SS. The shear strength of trabecular bone from the femur, and some factors affecting the shear strength of the cement-bone interface. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1978;92:19–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Krause WR, Krug W, Miller J. Strength of the cement-bone interface. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982;163:290–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Panjabi MM, Goel VK, Drinker H, Wong J, Kamire G, Walter SD. Effect of pressurization on methylmethacrylate-bone interdigitation: An in vitro study of canine femora. J Biomech 1983;16:473–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lee AJ, Ling RS. A device to improve the extrusion of bone cement into the bone of the acetabulum in the replacement of the hip joint. Biomed Eng 1974;9:522–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Markolf KL, Amstutz HC. Penetration and flow of acrylic bone cement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976;121: 99–102.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ling RS, Lee AJ, Gie GA, Timperley AJ, Hubble MW, Howell JR, et al. The Exeter Hip: 40 Years of Innovation in Total Hip Arthoplasty. 1st ed. Exeter, Exeter Hip Publishing; 2010.

  46. Barrack RL, Mulroy RD Jr., Harris WH. Improved cementing techniques and femoral component loosening in young patients with hip arthroplast. A 12-year radiographic review. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992;74:385–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ritter MA, Zhou H, Keating CM, Keating EM, Faris PM, Meding JB, et al. Radiological factors influencing femoral and acetabular failure in cemented Charnley total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999;81:982–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Byrick RJ, Bell RS, Kay JC, Waddell JP, Mullen JB. High-volume, high-pressure pulsatile lavage during cemented arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989;71:1331–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Christie J, Robinson CM, Singer B, Ray DC. Medullary lavage reduces embolic phenomena and cardiopulmonary changes during cemented hemiarthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995;77:456–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Breusch SJ, Reitzel T, Schneider U, Volkmann M, Ewerbeck V, Lukoschek M. Cemented hip prosthesis implantation – Decreasing the rate of fat embolism with pulsed pressure lavage. Orthopade 2000;29:578–86.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Clarius M, Heisel C, Breush SJ. Pulmonary embolism in cemented total hip arthroplasty. In: Breusch SJ, Malchau H, editors. The Well-Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer Medizin Verlag; 2005. p. 320–31.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  52. Malchau H, Herberts P, Soderman P, Oden A. Prognosis of Total Hip Replacements. Update and Validation of Results from the Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register 1979–1998; Presented at the 67th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Orlando, March 15–19, 2000.

  53. Heisel C, Norman T, Rupp R, Pritsch M, Ewerbeck V, Breusch SJ. In vitro performance of intramedullary cement restrictors in total hip arthroplasty. J Biomech 2003;36:835–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. McCaskie AW, Barnes MR, Lin E, Harper WM, Gregg PJ. Cement pressurisation during hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1997;79:379–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Acharya A, Petheram T, Hubble M, Howell J. Sealing the acetabular notch in cemented total hip arthroplasty. A radiological review of 380 cases. Acta Orthop Belg 2010;76:199–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Maggs JL, Smeatham A, Whitehouse SL, Charity J, Timperley AJ, Gie GA. The exeter contemporary flanged cemented acetabular component in primary total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2016;98-B: 307–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Carrington NC, Sierra RJ, Gie GA, Hubble MJ, Timperley AJ, Howell JR. The Exeter Universal cemented femoral component at 15 to 17 years: An update on the first 325 hips. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:730–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Hook S, Moulder E, Yates PJ, Burston BJ, Whitley E, Bannister GC. The Exeter Universal stem: A minimum ten-year review from an independent centre. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006;88:1584–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Fujita H, Katayama N, Iwase T, Otsuka H. Multi-center study of use of the Exeter stem in Japan: Evaluation of 100 primary THA. J Orthop Sci 2012;17:370–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. The NJR Centre. National Joint Registry for England and Wales. 11th Annual Report. The NJR Centre, Hemel Hempstead; 2014.

  61. Hailer NP, Garellick G, Karrholm J. Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2010;81:34–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Hooper GJ, Roth well AG, Stringer M, Frampton C. Revision following cemented and uncemented primary total hip replacement: A seven-year analysis from the New Zealand Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:451–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Makela KT, Matilainen M, Pulkkinen P, Fenstad AM, Havelin L, Engesaeter L, et al. Failure rate of cemented and uncemented total hip replacements: Register study of combined Nordic database of four nations. BMJ 2014;348:f7592.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Murray DW. Cemented femoral fixation: The North Atlantic divide. Bone Joint J 2013;95-B 11 Suppl A:51–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Sharkey PF, Shastri S, Teloken MA, Parvizi J, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH. Relationship between surgical volume and early outcomes of total hip arthroplasty: Do results continue to get better? J Arthroplasty 2004;19:694–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Doro C, Dimick J, Wainess R, Upchurch G, Urquhart A. Hospital volume and inpatient mortality outcomes of total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Arthroplasty 2006;21 6 Suppl 2:10–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhan C, Kaczmarek R, Loyo-Berrios N, Sangl J, Bright RA. Incidence and short-term outcomes of primary and revision hip replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89:526–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Troelsen A, Malchau E, Sillesen N, Malchau H. A review of current fixation use and registry outcomes in total hip arthroplasty: The uncemented paradox. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2013;471:2052–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Corbett KL, Losina E, Nti AA, Prokopetz JJ, Katz JN. Population-based rates of revision of primary total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review. PLoS One 2010;5:el3520.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Morshed S, Bozic KJ, Ries MD, Malchau H, Colford JM Jr. Comparison of cemented and uncemented fixation in total hip replacement: A meta-analysis. Acta Orthop 2007;78:315–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Clement ND, Biant LC, Breusch SJ. Total hip arthroplasty: To cement or not to cement the acetabular socket? A critical review of the literature. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012;132:411–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Toossi N, Adeli B, Timperley AJ, Haddad FS, Maltenfort M, Parvizi J. Acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty: Is there evidence that cementless fixation is better? J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013;95:168–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Kandala NB, Connock M, Pulikottil-Jacob R, Sutcliffe R Crowther MJ, Grove A, et al. Setting benchmark revision rates for total hip replacement: Analysis of registry evidence. BMJ 2015;350:h756.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Dorr LD, Faugere MC, Mackel AM, Gruen TA, Bognar B, Malluche HH. Structural and cellular assessment of bone quality of proximal femur. Bone 1993;14:231–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Abdulkarim A, Ellanti R Motterlini N, Fahey T, O’Byrne JM. Cemented versus uncemented fixation in total hip replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 2013;5:e8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Rolfson O, Garellick G, Kärrholm J, Donahue GS, Hallsten M, Nemes S, et al. Patient-reported outcomes in cemented and uncemented total hip replacements. Hip Int 2016;26:451–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Thien TM, Chatziagorou G, Garellick G, Furnes O, Havelin LI, Makela K, et al. Periprosthetic femoral fracture within two years after total hip replacement: Analysis of 437,629 operations in the nordic arthroplasty register association database. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014;96:el67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Nickelsen TN, Erenbjerg M, Retpen JB, Solgaard S. Femoral revision with impaction allografting and an uncemented femoral component. Hip Int 2008;18:278–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Steele R, Lamberton TD, Gie GA. Revision of the femoral component: Impaction grafting. In: Ling RS, Lee AJ, Gie GA, Timperley AJ, Hubble MJ, Howell JR, et al., editors. The Exeter Hip: 40 Years of Innovation in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Exeter, Exeter Hip Publishing; 2010. p. 321–8.

  80. Wilson MJ, Hook S, Whitehouse SL, Timperley AJ, Gie GA. Femoral impaction bone grafting in revision hip arthroplasty: 705 cases from the originating centre. Bone Joint J 2016;98-B: 1611–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Pennington M, Grieve R, Sekhon JS, Gregg R Black N, van der Meulen JH. Cemented, cementless, and hybrid prostheses for total hip replacement: Cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ 2013;346:fl026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Khanna G, Cernovsky J. Bone cement and the implications for anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2012;12:213–216.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Donaldson AJ, Thomson HE, Harper NJ, Kenny NW. Bone cement implantation syndrome. Br J Anaesth 2009;102:12–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Tryba M, Linde I, Voshage G, Zenz M. Histamine release and cardiovascular reactions to implantation of bone cement during total hip replacement. Anaesthesist 1991;40:25–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Lewis RN. Some studies of the complement system during total hip replacement using bone cement under general anaesthesia. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1997;14:35–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Motobe T, Hashiguchi T, Uchimura T, Yamakuchi M, Taniguchi N, Komiya S, et al. Endogenous cannabinoids are candidates for lipid mediators of bone cement implantation syndrome. Shock 2004;21:8–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Sierra RJ, Timperley JA, Gie GA. Contemporary cementing technique and mortality during and after Exeter total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009;24:325–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Jamsen E, Eskelinen A, Peltola M, Makela K. High early failure rate after cementless hip replacement in the octogenarian. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014;472:2779–89.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Hunt LP, Ben-Shlomo Y, Clark EM, Dieppe P, Judge A, MacGregor AJ, et al. 90-day mortality after 409,096 total hip replacements for osteoarthritis, from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales: A retrospective analysis. Lancet 2013;382:1097–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Costa ML, Griffin XL, Pendleton N, Pearson M, Parsons N Does cementing the femoral component increase the risk of peri-operative mortality for patients having replacement surgery for a fracture of the neck of femur? Data from the National Hip Fracture Database. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:1405–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre, EX2 5DW, Exeter, UK

    Joanna Maggs & Matthew Wilson

Authors
  1. Joanna Maggs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthew Wilson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matthew Wilson.

Additional information

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maggs, J., Wilson, M. The Relative Merits of Cemented and Uncemented Prostheses in Total Hip Arthroplasty. IJOO 51, 377–385 (2017). https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_405_16

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_405_16

Keywords

MeSH terms

Search

Navigation