Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Complications Associated with Locking Plate of Proximal Humerus Fractures

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Proximal humerus fractures constitute a significant percentage of fragility fractures. The growing use of locking plate has helped treat this problem, but at the same time has brought about complications. Past systematic reviews have documented these complications, however a large number of recent studies have been published since, reporting their own complication rates with different techniques. This study reviews the current complications associated with locking plate of proximal humerus fractures as well as methods to reduce them. A systematic review, following the PRISMA guidelines, was conducted in November 2013 and repeated in March 2015, using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, to evaluate locking plate fixation (and complications) of traumatic proximal humerus fractures. Inclusion criteria included adults (>18 years), minimum of 12-month postoperative followup, articles within the last 5 years, and studies with >10 participants. Exclusion criteria included pathologic fractures, cadaveric studies, and nonhuman subjects. Eligible studies were graded using a quality scoring system. Articles with a minimum of 7/10 score were included and assessed regarding their level of evidence per the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery and Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines. The initial query identified 51,206 articles from multiple databases. These records were thoroughly screened and resulted in 57 articles, consisting of seven Level 1, three Level 2, 10 Level 3, and 37 Level 4 studies, totaling 3422 proximal humerus fractures treated with locking plates. Intraarticular screw penetration was the most reported complication (9.5%), followed by varus collapse (6.8%), subacromial impingement (5.0%), avascular necrosis (4.6%), adhesive capsulitis (4.0%), nonunion (1.5%), and deep infection (1.4%). Reoperation occurred at a rate of 13.8%. Collapse at the fracture site contributed to a majority of the implant-related complications, which in turn were the main reasons for reoperation. The authors of these studies discussed different techniques that could be used to address these issues. Expanding use of locking plate in the proximal humerus fractures leads to improvements and advancements in surgical technique. Further research is necessary to outline indications to decrease complications, further.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: A review. Injury 2006;37:691–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Karl JW, Olson PR, Rosenwasser MP. The epidemiology of upper extremity fractures in the United States, 2009. J Orthop Trauma 2015;29:e242–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Roux A, Decroocq L, El Batti S, Bonnevialle N, Moineau G, Trojani C, et al. Epidemiology of proximal humerus fractures managed in a trauma center. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2012;98:715–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Launonen AP, Lepola V, Saranko A, Flinkkilä T, Laitinen M, Mattila VM, et al. Epidemiology of proximal humerus fractures. Arch Osteoporos 2015;10:209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Handoll HH, Ollivere BJ, Rollins KE. Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;12:CD000434.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Egol KA, Kubiak EN, Fulkerson E, Kummer FJ, Koval KJ. Biomechanics of locked plates and screws. J Orthop Trauma 2004;18:488–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Frich LH, Jensen NC. Bone properties of the humeral head and resistance to screw cutout. Int J Shoulder Surg 2014;8:21–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Thanasas C, Kontakis G, Angoules A, Limb D, Giannoudis P. Treatment of proximal humerus fractures with locking plates: A systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009;18:837–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sproul RC, Iyengar JJ, Devcic Z, Feeley BT. A systematic review of locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures. Injury 2011;42:408–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Jobin CM, Galdi B, Anakwenze OA, Ahmad CS, Levine WN. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the management of proximal humerus fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2015;23:190–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Badman BL, Mighell M. Fixed-angle locked plating of two-, three-, and four-part proximal humerus fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2008;16:294–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Harris JD, Quatman CE, Manring MM, Siston RA, Flanigan DC. How to write a systematic review. Am J Sports Med 2014;42:2761–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Papadokostakis G, Papakostidis C, Dimitriou R, Giannoudis PV. The role and efficacy of retrograding nailing for the treatment of diaphyseal and distal femoral fractures: A systematic review of the literature. Injury 2005;36:813–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Aggarwal S, Bali K, Dhillon MS, Kumar V, Mootha AK. Displaced proximal humeral fractures: An Indian experience with locking plates. J Orthop Surg Res 2010;5:60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Bachelier F, Pizanis A, Schwitalla J, Pohlemann T, Kohn D, Wirbel R, et al. Treatment for displaced proximal humerus fractures: Comparison of interlocking plate fixation versus minimal invasive techniques. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2014;24:707–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Badman B, Frankle M, Keating C, Henderson L, Brooks J, Mighell M, et al. Results of proximal humeral locked plating with supplemental suture fixation of rotator cuff. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20:616–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Barco R, Barrientos I, Encinas C, Antuña SA. Minimally invasive poly-axial screw plating for three-part fractures of the proximal humerus. Injury 2012;43 Suppl 2:S7–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Barlow JD, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Torchia M. Proximal humerus fractures in the elderly can be reliably fixed with a “hybrid” locked-plating technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469:3281–91.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Buecking B, Mohr J, Bockmann B, Zettl R, Ruchholtz S. Deltoid-split or deltopectoral approaches for the treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2014;472:1576–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cai M, Tao K, Yang C, Li S. Internal fixation versus shoulder hemiarthroplasty for displaced 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. Orthopedics 2012;35:e1340–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen Y, Zhang K, Qiang M, Li H, Dai H. Computer-assisted preoperative planning for proximal humeral fractures by minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis. Chin Med J (Engl) 2014;127:3278–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Chowdary U, Prasad H, Subramanyam PK. Outcome of locking compression plating for proximal humeral fractures: A prospective study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2014;22:4–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Clavert P, Adam P, Bevort A, Bonnomet F, Kempf JF. Pitfalls and complications with locking plate for proximal humerus fracture. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010;19:489–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. de Kruijf M, Vroemen JP, de Leur K, van der Voort EA, Vos DI, Van der Laan L, et al. Proximal fractures of the humerus in patients older than 75 years of age: Should we consider operative treatment? J Orthop Traumatol 2014;15:111–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Duralde XA, Leddy LR. The results of ORIF of displaced unstable proximal humeral fractures using a locking plate. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010;19:480–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Egol KA, Sugi MT, Ong CC, Montero N, Davidovitch R, Zuckerman JD, et al. Fracture site augmentation with calcium phosphate cement reduces screw penetration after open reduction-internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2012;21:741–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fjalestad T, Hole MØ, Hovden IA, Blücher J, Strømsøe K. Surgical treatment with an angular stable plate for complex displaced proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Trauma 2012;26:98–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gaheer RS, Hawkins A. Fixation of 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fractures using the PHILOS plate: Mid-term results. Orthopedics 2010;33:671.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gavaskar AS, Chowdary N, Abraham S. Complex proximal humerus fractures treated with locked plating utilizing an extended deltoid split approach with a shoulder strap incision. J Orthop Trauma 2013;27:73–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hirschmann MT, Fallegger B, Amsler F, Regazzoni P, Gross T. Clinical longer-term results after internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures with a locking compression plate (PHILOS). J Orthop Trauma 2011;25:286–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jung WB, Moon ES, Kim SK, Kovacevic D, Kim MS. Does medial support decrease major complications of unstable proximal humerus fractures treated with locking plate? BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2013;14:102.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Kim SH, Lee YH, Chung SW, Shin SH, Jang WY, Gong HS, et al. Outcomes for four-part proximal humerus fractures treated with a locking compression plate and an autologous iliac bone impaction graft. Injury 2012;43:1724–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Königshausen M, Kübler L, Godry H, Citak M, Schildhauer TA, Seybold D, et al. Clinical outcome and complications using a polyaxial locking plate in the treatment of displaced proximal humerus fractures. A reliable system? Injury 2012;43:223–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Konrad G, Hirschmüller A, Audige L, Lambert S, Hertel R, Südkamp NP, et al. Comparison of two different locking plates for two-, three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures — Results of an international multicentre study. Int Orthop 2012;36:1051–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kralinger F, Blauth M, Goldhahn J, Käch K, Voigt C, Platz A, et al. The influence of local bone density on the outcome of one hundred and fifty proximal humeral fractures treated with a locking plate. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014;96:1026–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Kumar C, Gupta AK, Nath R, Ahmad J. Open reduction and locking plate fixation of displaced proximal humerus fractures. Indian J Orthop 2013;47:156–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Lin T, Xiao B, Ma X, Fu D, Yang S. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis with a locking compression plate is superior to open reduction and internal fixation in the management of the proximal humerus fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014;15:206.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Little MT, Berkes MB, Schottel PC, Lazaro LE, LaMont LE, Pardee NC, et al. The impact of preoperative coronal plane deformity on proximal humerus fixation with endosteal augmentation. J Orthop Trauma 2014;28:338–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Liu K, Liu PC, Liu R, Wu X. Advantage of minimally invasive lateral approach relative to conventional deltopectoral approach for treatment of proximal humerus fractures. Med Sci Monit 2015;21:496–504.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Liu ZZ, Zhang GM, Ge T. Use of a proximal humeral internal locking system enhanced by injectable graft for minimally invasive treatment of osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. Orthop Surg 2011;3:253–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Martetschläger F, Siebenlist S, Weier M, Sandmann G, Ahrens P, Braun K, et al. Plating of proximal humeral fractures. Orthopedics 2012;35:e1606–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Matassi F, Angeloni R, Carulli C, Civinini R, Di Bella L, Redl B, et al. Locking plate and fibular allograft augmentation in unstable fractures of proximal humerus. Injury 2012;43:1939–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Matejcić A, Vidović D, Ivica M, Durdević D, Tomljenović M, Bekavac-Beslin M, et al. Internal fixation with locking plate of 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: Complications and functional outcome. Acta Clin Croat 2013;52:17–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Miyazaki AN, Estelles JR, Fregoneze M, Santos PD, da Silva LA, do Val Sella G, et al. Evaluation of the complications of surgical treatment of fractures of the proximal extremity of the humerus using a locking plate. Rev Bras Ortop 2012;47:568–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Norouzi M, Naderi MN, Komasi MH, Sharifzadeh SR, Shahrezaei M, Eajazi A, et al. Clinical results of using the proximal humeral internal locking system plate for internal fixation of displaced proximal humeral fractures. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 2012;41:E64–8.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ockert B, Siebenbürger G, Kettler M, Braunstein V, Mutschler W. Long term functional outcomes (median 10 years) after locked plating for displaced fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2014;23:1223–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Olerud P, Ahrengart L, Soderqvist A, Saving J, Tidermark J. Quality of life and functional outcome after a 2-part proximal humeral fracture: A prospective cohort study on 50 patients treated with a locking plate. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010;19:814–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Olerud P, Ahrengart L, Ponzer S, Saving J, Tidermark J. Internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: A randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20:747–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Osterhoff G, Hoch A, Wanner GA, Simmen HP, Werner CM. Calcar comminution as prognostic factor of clinical outcome after locking plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures. Injury 2012;43:1651–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Pak P, Eng K, Page RS. Fixed-angle locking proximal humerus plate: An evaluation of functional results and implant-related outcomes. ANZ J Surg 2013;83:878–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Parmaksizoğlu AS, Sökücü S, Ozkaya U, Kabukçuoğlu Y, Gül M. Locking plate fixation of three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2010;44:97–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ricchetti ET, Warrender WJ, Abboud JA. Use of locking plates in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010;19:66–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Robinson CM, Wylie JR, Ray AG, Dempster NJ, Olabi B, Seah KT, et al. Proximal humeral fractures with a severe varus deformity treated by fixation with a locking plate. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92:672–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Röderer G, Erhardt J, Graf M, Kinzl L, Gebhard F. Clinical results for minimally invasive locked plating of proximal humerus fractures. J Orthop Trauma 2010;24:400–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Sahu RJ. Minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures in osteoporotic patients with Philos plate. Bangladesh J Med Sci 2013;12:140–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sanders RJ, Thissen LG, Teepen JC, van Kampen A, Jaarsma RL. Locking plate versus nonsurgical treatment for proximal humeral fractures: Better midterm outcome with nonsurgical treatment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20:1118–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Schliemann B, Siemoneit J, Theisen C, Kosters C, Weimann A, Raschke MJ. Complex fractures of the proximal humerus in the elderly-outcome and complications after locking plate fixation. Musculoskelet Surg 2012;96:s3–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Schliemann B, Hartensuer R, Koch T, Theisen C, Raschke MJ, Kösters C, et al. Treatment of proximal humerus fractures with a CFR-PEEK plate: 2-year results of a prospective study and comparison to fixation with a conventional locking plate. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2015;24:1282–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Schulte LM, Matteini LE, Neviaser RJ. Proximal periarticular locking plates in proximal humeral fractures: Functional outcomes. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20:1234–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Sharma V, Balvinder S, Khare S. Management of proximal humeral fractures with proximal humerus locking plate — A prospective study. J Orthop Trauma Rehabil 2014;18:89–93.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Sohn HS, Shin SJ. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures: Clinical and radiologic outcomes according to fracture type. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2014;23:1334–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Spross C, Platz A, Rufibach K, Lattmann T, Forberger J, Dietrich M, et al. The PHILOS plate for proximal humeral fractures — Risk factors for complications at one year. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2012;72:783–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Trepat AD, Popescu D, Fernandez-Valencia JA, Cune J, Rios M, Prat S. Comparative study between locking plates versus proximal humeral nail for the treatment of 2-part proximal humeral fractures. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2012;22:373–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Verdano MA, Lunini E, Pellegrini A, Corsini T, Marenghi P, Ceccarelli F, et al. Can the osteosynthesis with locking plates be a better treatment for unstable fractures of the proximal humerus? Musculoskelet Surg 2014;98:27–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Voigt C, Geisler A, Hepp P, Schulz AP, Lill H. Are polyaxially locked screws advantageous in the plate osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures in the elderly? A prospective randomized clinical observational study. J Orthop Trauma 2011;25:596–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Wild JR, DeMers A, French R, Shipps MR, Bergin PF, Musapatika D, et al. Functional outcomes for surgically treated 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fractures. Orthopedics 2011;34:e629–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Wu CH, Ma CH, Yeh JJ, Yen CY, Yu SW, Tu YK, et al. Locked plating for proximal humeral fractures: Differences between the deltopectoral and deltoid-splitting approaches. J Trauma 2011;71:1364–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Yang H, Li Z, Zhou F, Wang D, Zhong B. A prospective clinical study of proximal humerus fractures treated with a locking proximal humerus plate. J Orthop Trauma 2011;25:11–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Zhang L, Zheng J, Wang W, Lin G, Huang Y, Zheng J, et al. The clinical benefit of medial support screws in locking plating of proximal humerus fractures: A prospective randomized study. Int Orthop 2011;35:1655–61.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Zhu Y, Lu Y, Shen J, Zhang J, Jiang C. Locking intramedullary nails and locking plates in the treatment of two-part proximal humeral surgical neck fractures: A prospective randomized trial with a minimum of three years of followup. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93:159–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Ricchetti ET, DeMola PM, Roman D, Abboud JA. The use of precontoured humeral locking plates in the management of displaced proximal humerus fracture. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009;17:582–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Hertel R, Hempfing A, Stiehler M, Leunig M. Predictors of humeral head ischemia after intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2004;13:427–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Wang J, Zhu Y, Zhang F, Chen W, Tian Y, Zhang Y, et al. Meta-analysis suggests that reverse shoulder arthroplasty in proximal humerus fractures is a better option than hemiarthroplasty in the elderly. Int Orthop 2016;40:531–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Kirchhoff C, Braunstein V, Kirchhoff S, Sprecher CM, Ockert B, Fischer F, et al. Outcome analysis following removal of locking plate fixation of the proximal humerus. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008;9:138.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  75. Brorson S, Rasmussen JV, Frich LH, Olsen BS, Hróbjartsson A. Benefits and harms of locking plate osteosynthesis in intraarticular (OTA type C) fractures of the proximal humerus: A systematic review. Injury 2012;43:999–1005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Tepass A, Rolauffs B, Weise K, Bahrs SD, Dietz K, Bahrs C, et al. Complication rates and outcomes stratified by treatment modalities in proximal humeral fractures: A systematic literature review from 1970-2009. Patient Saf Surg 2013;7:34.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Jost B, Spross C, Grehn H, Gerber C. Locking plate fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus: Analysis of complications, revision strategies and outcome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013;22:542–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Handoll H, Brealey S, Rangan A, Keding A, Corbacho B, Jefferson L, et al. The proFHER (PROximal fracture of the humerus: Evaluation by randomisation) trial — A pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial evaluating the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical compared with non-surgical treatment for proximal fracture of the humerus in adults. Health Technol Assess 2015;19:1–280.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Bae JH, Oh JK, Chon CS, Oh CW, Hwang JH, Yoon YC, et al. The biomechanical performance of locking plate fixation with intramedullary fibular strut graft augmentation in the treatment of unstable fractures of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:937–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Drexel University College of Medicine, Hahnemann University Hospital, 245 N. 15th St. M.S. 420, Philadelphia, PA, 19103, USA

    Venkat Kavuri, Blake Bowden, Neil Kumar & Doug Cerynik

Authors
  1. Venkat Kavuri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Blake Bowden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Neil Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Doug Cerynik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Venkat Kavuri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kavuri, V., Bowden, B., Kumar, N. et al. Complications Associated with Locking Plate of Proximal Humerus Fractures. IJOO 52, 108–116 (2018). https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_243_17

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_243_17

Keywords

MeSH terms

Search

Navigation