Erratum

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: did it ever work?

A narrative review from basic research to proposed disease framework and science of clinical practice

Aleksi REITO 1, Ian A HARRIS 2, and Teemu KARJALAINEN 3

1 Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Tampere University Hospital, and Faculty of Medicine and Health Technology, Tampere University, Finland; 2 Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, South Western Sydney Clinical School, UNSW Sydney, Australia; 3 Central Finland Hospital, Jyväskylä, Finland

 

Citation: Acta Orthopaedica 2022; 93: 92. DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2021.1994233.

Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution to the original work.

Published: 2022-01-03.

Correspondence: aleksi@reito.fi

ACTA ORTHOP 2022; 93 :82–91. DOI 10.1080/17453674.2021.1979793

 

Error in listed references

Contradicting the clinical experience

The FIDELITY trial caused a pushback from the orthopedic community defending APM (Krogsgaard et al. 2014, Lubowitz et al. 2014, Rossi et al. 2014, Sutherland et al. 2014, Sochacki et al. 2020).

Correction

Contradicting the clinical experience

The FIDELITY trial caused a pushback from the orthopedic community defending APM (Krogsgaard et al. 2014, Lubowitz et al. 2014, Rossi et al. 2014, Sochacki et al. 2020).

[Reference omitted]