The Influence of Geometry of Implants for Direct Skeletal Attachment of Limb Prosthesis on Rehabilitation Program and Stress-Shielding Intensity

The purpose of the research was to evaluate the influence of selected parameters of the implants for bone anchored prostheses on possibility of conducting static load bearing exercises and stress-shielding intensity. A press-fit implant, a threaded implant, and the proposed design were compared usin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BioMed research international 2019, Vol.2019 (2019), p.1-17
Hauptverfasser: Prochor, Piotr, Sajewicz, Eugeniusz
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 17
container_issue 2019
container_start_page 1
container_title BioMed research international
container_volume 2019
creator Prochor, Piotr
Sajewicz, Eugeniusz
description The purpose of the research was to evaluate the influence of selected parameters of the implants for bone anchored prostheses on possibility of conducting static load bearing exercises and stress-shielding intensity. A press-fit implant, a threaded implant, and the proposed design were compared using the finite element method. For the analyses two features were examined: diameter (19.0 – 21.0 mm) and length (75.0 – 130.0 mm). To define the possibility of conducting rehabilitation exercises the micromotion of implants while axial loading with a force up to 1000 N was examined to evaluate the changes at implant-bone interface. The stress-shielding intensity was estimated by bone mass loss over 60 months. The results suggest that, in terms of micromotion generated during rehabilitation exercises, the threaded (max. micromotion of 16.00 μm) and the proposed (max. micromotion of 45.43 μm) implants ensure low and appropriate micromotion. In the case of the press-fit solution the load values should be selected with care, as there is a risk of losing primary stabilisation. The allowed forces (that do not stimulate the organism to generate fibrous tissue) were approx. 140 N in the case of the length of 75 mm, increasing up to 560 N, while using the length of 130 mm. Moreover, obtained stress-shielding intensities suggest that the proposed implant should provide appropriate secondary stability, similar to the threaded solution, due to the low bone mass loss during long-term use (improving at the same time more bone remodelling in distal Gruen zones, by providing lower bone mass loss by approx. 13% to 20% in dependency of the length and diameter used). On this basis it can be concluded that the proposed design can be an appropriate alternative to commercially used implants.
doi_str_mv 10.1155/2019/6067952
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6644269</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A603404016</galeid><sourcerecordid>A603404016</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c499t-6598838778f1aa0440b11127696f6d47fd4244da9aff9ba7a5085807e6f93a7a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2LEzEUhgdR3GXdO68l4I2gdfM1yeRGKKuuhYJi1-uQzpx0ss4kNUmV_gt_shlau-qVuck5nIf3fPBW1VOCXxNS11cUE3UlsJCqpg-qc8oInwnCycNTzNhZdZnSHS6vIQIr8bg6Y4QJLIk8r37e9oAW3g478C2gYNENhBFy3E_xYtwOxueEbIjorYvQZrT6CgNkM6B5zqbtR_B5QpduXKNPMaTcQ3IJBY8-Q2_WbnDZZFfSUtxEMyLjO7TKEVKarXoHQ-f8poyQwSeX90-qR9YMCS6P_0X15f272-sPs-XHm8X1fDlruVJ5JmrVNKyRsrHEGMw5XhNCqBRKWNFxaTtOOe-MMtaqtZGmxk3dYAnCKlZSdlG9Oehud-sRurasEc2gt9GNJu51ME7_XfGu15vwXQvBORWqCLw4CsTwbQcp69GlFoZyMAi7pCkVEpPp0gV9_g96F3bRl_UmihAmCVX31MYMoJ23ofRtJ1E9F5hxzDGZtF4dqLbcOkWwp5EJ1pMn9OQJffREwZ_9ueYJ_u2AArw8AL3znfnh_lMOCgPW3NOECk4Z-wXoGMhY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2261137129</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Influence of Geometry of Implants for Direct Skeletal Attachment of Limb Prosthesis on Rehabilitation Program and Stress-Shielding Intensity</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><creator>Prochor, Piotr ; Sajewicz, Eugeniusz</creator><contributor>Han, Dong-Wook</contributor><creatorcontrib>Prochor, Piotr ; Sajewicz, Eugeniusz ; Han, Dong-Wook</creatorcontrib><description>The purpose of the research was to evaluate the influence of selected parameters of the implants for bone anchored prostheses on possibility of conducting static load bearing exercises and stress-shielding intensity. A press-fit implant, a threaded implant, and the proposed design were compared using the finite element method. For the analyses two features were examined: diameter (19.0 – 21.0 mm) and length (75.0 – 130.0 mm). To define the possibility of conducting rehabilitation exercises the micromotion of implants while axial loading with a force up to 1000 N was examined to evaluate the changes at implant-bone interface. The stress-shielding intensity was estimated by bone mass loss over 60 months. The results suggest that, in terms of micromotion generated during rehabilitation exercises, the threaded (max. micromotion of 16.00 μm) and the proposed (max. micromotion of 45.43 μm) implants ensure low and appropriate micromotion. In the case of the press-fit solution the load values should be selected with care, as there is a risk of losing primary stabilisation. The allowed forces (that do not stimulate the organism to generate fibrous tissue) were approx. 140 N in the case of the length of 75 mm, increasing up to 560 N, while using the length of 130 mm. Moreover, obtained stress-shielding intensities suggest that the proposed implant should provide appropriate secondary stability, similar to the threaded solution, due to the low bone mass loss during long-term use (improving at the same time more bone remodelling in distal Gruen zones, by providing lower bone mass loss by approx. 13% to 20% in dependency of the length and diameter used). On this basis it can be concluded that the proposed design can be an appropriate alternative to commercially used implants.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2314-6133</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2314-6141</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1155/2019/6067952</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31360717</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cairo, Egypt: Hindawi Publishing Corporation</publisher><subject>Amputation ; Artificial Limbs ; Biomechanics ; Biomedical research ; Bone implants ; Bone mass ; Bone Remodeling ; Bone-Implant Interface ; Bones ; Comparative analysis ; Density ; Dependence ; Femur ; Finite element method ; Humans ; Implants, Artificial ; Joint surgery ; Load ; Long bone ; Mechanical loading ; Models, Biological ; Prostheses ; Prosthesis ; Prosthesis Design ; Prosthetics ; Rehabilitation ; Static loads ; Stress ; Stress shielding ; Surgical implants ; Transplants &amp; implants ; Weight-Bearing</subject><ispartof>BioMed research international, 2019, Vol.2019 (2019), p.1-17</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2019 Piotr Prochor and Eugeniusz Sajewicz.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2019 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Piotr Prochor and Eugeniusz Sajewicz. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0</rights><rights>Copyright © 2019 Piotr Prochor and Eugeniusz Sajewicz. 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c499t-6598838778f1aa0440b11127696f6d47fd4244da9aff9ba7a5085807e6f93a7a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c499t-6598838778f1aa0440b11127696f6d47fd4244da9aff9ba7a5085807e6f93a7a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9988-3859</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6644269/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6644269/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,4010,27900,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31360717$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Han, Dong-Wook</contributor><creatorcontrib>Prochor, Piotr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sajewicz, Eugeniusz</creatorcontrib><title>The Influence of Geometry of Implants for Direct Skeletal Attachment of Limb Prosthesis on Rehabilitation Program and Stress-Shielding Intensity</title><title>BioMed research international</title><addtitle>Biomed Res Int</addtitle><description>The purpose of the research was to evaluate the influence of selected parameters of the implants for bone anchored prostheses on possibility of conducting static load bearing exercises and stress-shielding intensity. A press-fit implant, a threaded implant, and the proposed design were compared using the finite element method. For the analyses two features were examined: diameter (19.0 – 21.0 mm) and length (75.0 – 130.0 mm). To define the possibility of conducting rehabilitation exercises the micromotion of implants while axial loading with a force up to 1000 N was examined to evaluate the changes at implant-bone interface. The stress-shielding intensity was estimated by bone mass loss over 60 months. The results suggest that, in terms of micromotion generated during rehabilitation exercises, the threaded (max. micromotion of 16.00 μm) and the proposed (max. micromotion of 45.43 μm) implants ensure low and appropriate micromotion. In the case of the press-fit solution the load values should be selected with care, as there is a risk of losing primary stabilisation. The allowed forces (that do not stimulate the organism to generate fibrous tissue) were approx. 140 N in the case of the length of 75 mm, increasing up to 560 N, while using the length of 130 mm. Moreover, obtained stress-shielding intensities suggest that the proposed implant should provide appropriate secondary stability, similar to the threaded solution, due to the low bone mass loss during long-term use (improving at the same time more bone remodelling in distal Gruen zones, by providing lower bone mass loss by approx. 13% to 20% in dependency of the length and diameter used). On this basis it can be concluded that the proposed design can be an appropriate alternative to commercially used implants.</description><subject>Amputation</subject><subject>Artificial Limbs</subject><subject>Biomechanics</subject><subject>Biomedical research</subject><subject>Bone implants</subject><subject>Bone mass</subject><subject>Bone Remodeling</subject><subject>Bone-Implant Interface</subject><subject>Bones</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Density</subject><subject>Dependence</subject><subject>Femur</subject><subject>Finite element method</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implants, Artificial</subject><subject>Joint surgery</subject><subject>Load</subject><subject>Long bone</subject><subject>Mechanical loading</subject><subject>Models, Biological</subject><subject>Prostheses</subject><subject>Prosthesis</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Prosthetics</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Static loads</subject><subject>Stress</subject><subject>Stress shielding</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>Transplants &amp; implants</subject><subject>Weight-Bearing</subject><issn>2314-6133</issn><issn>2314-6141</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>RHX</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2LEzEUhgdR3GXdO68l4I2gdfM1yeRGKKuuhYJi1-uQzpx0ss4kNUmV_gt_shlau-qVuck5nIf3fPBW1VOCXxNS11cUE3UlsJCqpg-qc8oInwnCycNTzNhZdZnSHS6vIQIr8bg6Y4QJLIk8r37e9oAW3g478C2gYNENhBFy3E_xYtwOxueEbIjorYvQZrT6CgNkM6B5zqbtR_B5QpduXKNPMaTcQ3IJBY8-Q2_WbnDZZFfSUtxEMyLjO7TKEVKarXoHQ-f8poyQwSeX90-qR9YMCS6P_0X15f272-sPs-XHm8X1fDlruVJ5JmrVNKyRsrHEGMw5XhNCqBRKWNFxaTtOOe-MMtaqtZGmxk3dYAnCKlZSdlG9Oehud-sRurasEc2gt9GNJu51ME7_XfGu15vwXQvBORWqCLw4CsTwbQcp69GlFoZyMAi7pCkVEpPp0gV9_g96F3bRl_UmihAmCVX31MYMoJ23ofRtJ1E9F5hxzDGZtF4dqLbcOkWwp5EJ1pMn9OQJffREwZ_9ueYJ_u2AArw8AL3znfnh_lMOCgPW3NOECk4Z-wXoGMhY</recordid><startdate>2019</startdate><enddate>2019</enddate><creator>Prochor, Piotr</creator><creator>Sajewicz, Eugeniusz</creator><general>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</general><general>Hindawi</general><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>Hindawi Limited</general><scope>ADJCN</scope><scope>AHFXO</scope><scope>RHU</scope><scope>RHW</scope><scope>RHX</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CWDGH</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9988-3859</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>2019</creationdate><title>The Influence of Geometry of Implants for Direct Skeletal Attachment of Limb Prosthesis on Rehabilitation Program and Stress-Shielding Intensity</title><author>Prochor, Piotr ; Sajewicz, Eugeniusz</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c499t-6598838778f1aa0440b11127696f6d47fd4244da9aff9ba7a5085807e6f93a7a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Amputation</topic><topic>Artificial Limbs</topic><topic>Biomechanics</topic><topic>Biomedical research</topic><topic>Bone implants</topic><topic>Bone mass</topic><topic>Bone Remodeling</topic><topic>Bone-Implant Interface</topic><topic>Bones</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Density</topic><topic>Dependence</topic><topic>Femur</topic><topic>Finite element method</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implants, Artificial</topic><topic>Joint surgery</topic><topic>Load</topic><topic>Long bone</topic><topic>Mechanical loading</topic><topic>Models, Biological</topic><topic>Prostheses</topic><topic>Prosthesis</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Prosthetics</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Static loads</topic><topic>Stress</topic><topic>Stress shielding</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>Transplants &amp; implants</topic><topic>Weight-Bearing</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Prochor, Piotr</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sajewicz, Eugeniusz</creatorcontrib><collection>الدوريات العلمية والإحصائية - e-Marefa Academic and Statistical Periodicals</collection><collection>معرفة - المحتوى العربي الأكاديمي المتكامل - e-Marefa Academic Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Complete</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Subscription Journals</collection><collection>Hindawi Publishing Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Middle East &amp; Africa Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies &amp; Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BioMed research international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Prochor, Piotr</au><au>Sajewicz, Eugeniusz</au><au>Han, Dong-Wook</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Influence of Geometry of Implants for Direct Skeletal Attachment of Limb Prosthesis on Rehabilitation Program and Stress-Shielding Intensity</atitle><jtitle>BioMed research international</jtitle><addtitle>Biomed Res Int</addtitle><date>2019</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>2019</volume><issue>2019</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>17</epage><pages>1-17</pages><issn>2314-6133</issn><eissn>2314-6141</eissn><abstract>The purpose of the research was to evaluate the influence of selected parameters of the implants for bone anchored prostheses on possibility of conducting static load bearing exercises and stress-shielding intensity. A press-fit implant, a threaded implant, and the proposed design were compared using the finite element method. For the analyses two features were examined: diameter (19.0 – 21.0 mm) and length (75.0 – 130.0 mm). To define the possibility of conducting rehabilitation exercises the micromotion of implants while axial loading with a force up to 1000 N was examined to evaluate the changes at implant-bone interface. The stress-shielding intensity was estimated by bone mass loss over 60 months. The results suggest that, in terms of micromotion generated during rehabilitation exercises, the threaded (max. micromotion of 16.00 μm) and the proposed (max. micromotion of 45.43 μm) implants ensure low and appropriate micromotion. In the case of the press-fit solution the load values should be selected with care, as there is a risk of losing primary stabilisation. The allowed forces (that do not stimulate the organism to generate fibrous tissue) were approx. 140 N in the case of the length of 75 mm, increasing up to 560 N, while using the length of 130 mm. Moreover, obtained stress-shielding intensities suggest that the proposed implant should provide appropriate secondary stability, similar to the threaded solution, due to the low bone mass loss during long-term use (improving at the same time more bone remodelling in distal Gruen zones, by providing lower bone mass loss by approx. 13% to 20% in dependency of the length and diameter used). On this basis it can be concluded that the proposed design can be an appropriate alternative to commercially used implants.</abstract><cop>Cairo, Egypt</cop><pub>Hindawi Publishing Corporation</pub><pmid>31360717</pmid><doi>10.1155/2019/6067952</doi><tpages>17</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9988-3859</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2314-6133
ispartof BioMed research international, 2019, Vol.2019 (2019), p.1-17
issn 2314-6133
2314-6141
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6644269
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Open Access; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection; PubMed Central Open Access
subjects Amputation
Artificial Limbs
Biomechanics
Biomedical research
Bone implants
Bone mass
Bone Remodeling
Bone-Implant Interface
Bones
Comparative analysis
Density
Dependence
Femur
Finite element method
Humans
Implants, Artificial
Joint surgery
Load
Long bone
Mechanical loading
Models, Biological
Prostheses
Prosthesis
Prosthesis Design
Prosthetics
Rehabilitation
Static loads
Stress
Stress shielding
Surgical implants
Transplants & implants
Weight-Bearing
title The Influence of Geometry of Implants for Direct Skeletal Attachment of Limb Prosthesis on Rehabilitation Program and Stress-Shielding Intensity
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-10T08%3A01%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Influence%20of%20Geometry%20of%20Implants%20for%20Direct%20Skeletal%20Attachment%20of%20Limb%20Prosthesis%20on%20Rehabilitation%20Program%20and%20Stress-Shielding%20Intensity&rft.jtitle=BioMed%20research%20international&rft.au=Prochor,%20Piotr&rft.date=2019&rft.volume=2019&rft.issue=2019&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=17&rft.pages=1-17&rft.issn=2314-6133&rft.eissn=2314-6141&rft_id=info:doi/10.1155/2019/6067952&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA603404016%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2261137129&rft_id=info:pmid/31360717&rft_galeid=A603404016&rfr_iscdi=true