AngthongC. Anatomic total talar prosthesis replacement surgery and ankle arthroplasty: an early case series in Thailand. Orthop Rev. 2014;6:5486.
2.
BooneDW. Complications of iliac crest graft and bone grafting alternatives in foot and ankle surgery. Foot Ankle Clin. 2003;8:1-14.
3.
BouchardMBarkerLGClaridgeRJ. Technique tip: tantalum: a structural bone graft option for foot and ankle surgery. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25(1):39-42.
4.
ChungKCSaddawi-KonefkaDHaaseSCKaulG. A cost-utility analysis of amputation versus salvage for Gustilo type IIIB and IIIC open tibial fractures. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:1965-1973.
5.
ChungYKChungS. Ipsilateral island fibula transfer for segmental tibial defects: antegrade and retrograde fashion. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;101:375-382; discussion 83-84.
ContiSFWongYS. Osteolysis of structural autograft after calcaneocuboid distraction arthrodesis for stage II posterior tibial tendon dysfunction. Foot Ankle Int. 2002;23(6):521-529.
8.
GustiloRBAndersonJT. Prevention of infection in the treatment of one thousand and twenty-five open fractures of long bones: retrospective and prospective analyses. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976;58:453-458.
9.
HamidKSNwachukwuBUEllisSJ. Competing in value-based health care: keys to winning the foot race. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(5):519-528.
LowenbergDWBunticRFBunckeGMParrettBM. Long-term results and costs of muscle flap coverage with Ilizarov bone transport in lower limb salvage. J Orthop Trauma. 2013;27:576-581.
12.
MasqueletACFitoussiFBegueTMullerGP. Reconstruction of the long bones by the induced membrane and spongy autograft [in French]. Ann Chir Plast Esthet. 2000;45:346-353.
13.
McGarveyWCBralyWG. Bone graft in hindfoot arthrodesis: allograft vs autograft. Orthopedics. 1996;19:389-394.
14.
MichalskiMHRossJS. The shape of things to come: 3D printing in medicine. JAMA. 2014;312:2213-2214.
15.
NabaviAOlwillCM. Early outcome after total knee replacement using computed tomography-based patient-specific cutting blocks versus standard instrumentation. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2015;23:182-184.
16.
NaggarLChevalleyFBlancCHLivioJJ. Treatment of large bone defects with the Ilizarov technique. J Trauma. 1993;34:390-393.
17.
PaleyDCatagniMAArgnaniFVillaABenedettiGBCattaneoR. Ilizarov treatment of tibial nonunions with bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;241:146-165.
18.
PapadelisEAKarampinasPKKavroudakisEVlamisJPolizoisVDPneumaticosSG. Isolated subtalar distraction arthrodesis using porous tantalum: a pilot study. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(9):1084-1088.
19.
SagherianBHClaridgeRJ. Porous tantalum as a structural graft in foot and ankle surgery. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33(3):179-189.
20.
SzczechBMcDermottJDIssaK, et al. Patient-specific instrumentation in total knee arthroplasty: what is the evidence?J Knee Surg. 2015.
21.
TropetYJeunetLVichardP. Les pertes de substances traumatiques de jambe [Traumatic loss of limb]. Rev Chir Orthop. 2003;89:33-35.
22.
UzelAPLemonneFCasoliV. Tibial segmental bone defect reconstruction by Ilizarov type bone transport in an induced membrane. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010;96:194-198.
23.
WhitePBRanawatAS. Patient-specific total knees demonstrate a higher manipulation rate compared to “off-the-shelf implants.”J Arthroplasty. 2015.
