This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Chen, W.-S.
Right arrow Articles by McCabe, S. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Chen, W.-S.
Right arrow Articles by McCabe, S. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 82:143-4 (2000)
© 2000 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

Correspondence

Correspondence

Wun-Schen Chen, M.D. and Steven J. McCabe, M.D., F.R.C.S.

TO THE EDITOR:

I read with interest the excellent article "Kienböck Disease and Negative Ulnar Variance" (80-A: 1154–1157, Aug. 1998), by Bonzar et al., in which the authors reported an association between negative ulnar variance and Kienböck disease. They also reported a negative association between age and negative ulnar variance in both the control subjects and the patients who had Kienböck disease. Bonzar et al. cited a study by Chan and Huang1, who reported a preponderance of positive ulnar variance and no instances of Kienböck disease in a Chinese population.

My colleagues and I, in a study of a Chinese population in Taiwan, observed different findings than did Chan and Huang1. From 1976 to 1997, we managed forty-five patients who had Kienböck disease. We reported the results for our early patients in 1988 and 19902,3. The mean ulnar variance was 0.313 ± 1.274 millimeter in 1000 normal . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?