77 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10960004)
21. Advanced computational framework for the automatic analysis of the acetabular morphology from the pelvic bone surface for hip arthroplasty applications.
Cerveri P; Marchente M; Chemello C; Confalonieri N; Manzotti A; Baroni G
Ann Biomed Eng; 2011 Nov; 39(11):2791-806. PubMed ID: 21814845
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Acetabular bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: principles and techniques.
Noordin S; Masri BA; Duncan CP; Garbuz DS
Instr Course Lect; 2010; 59():27-36. PubMed ID: 20415364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. The midterm and long-term effects of acetabular roof ring and Burch-Schneider anti-protusio cages in acetabular revisions for patients with acetabular bone deficiency.
Demir MT; Pirinççi Y; Salih M; Erdoğan F; Güney N
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc; 2015; 49(6):597-605. PubMed ID: 26511685
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Short-term results of a custom triflange acetabular component for massive acetabular bone loss in revision THA.
Wind MA; Swank ML; Sorger JI
Orthopedics; 2013 Mar; 36(3):e260-5. PubMed ID: 23464943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. High rate of failure of impaction grafting in large acetabular defects.
van Haaren EH; Heyligers IC; Alexander FG; Wuisman PI
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2007 Mar; 89(3):296-300. PubMed ID: 17356137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. A new technique for removing noncemented acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty.
Markovich GD; Banks SA; Hodge WA
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ); 1999 Jan; 28(1):35-7. PubMed ID: 10048356
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Extra-large uncemented acetabular components for hip revision].
Huang Z; Zhang W; Lin J; Li W; Bai G; Shen R
Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2013 Nov; 27(11):1313-7. PubMed ID: 24501889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Management of type III acetabular deficiencies in revision total hip arthroplasty without structural bone graft.
Sutherland CJ
J South Orthop Assoc; 1998; 7(1):36-42. PubMed ID: 9570730
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Factors affecting acetabular bone loss during primary hip arthroplasty--a quantitative analysis using computer simulation.
Lavigne M; Rama RK; Ganapathi M; Nuño N; Winzenrieth R; Vendittoli PA
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2008 Jun; 23(5):577-83. PubMed ID: 18295383
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Accuracy of an adjustable patient-specific guide for acetabular alignment in hip replacement surgery (Optihip).
Shandiz MA; MacKenzie JR; Hunt S; Anglin C
Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2014 Sep; 228(9):876-89. PubMed ID: 25313024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Cementless hemispheric hydroxyapatite-coated sockets for acetabular revision.
Geerdink CH; Schaafsma J; Meyers WG; Grimm B; Tonino AJ
J Arthroplasty; 2007 Apr; 22(3):369-76. PubMed ID: 17400093
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Revision total hip arthroplasty for pelvic discontinuity.
DeBoer DK; Christie MJ; Brinson MF; Morrison JC
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2007 Apr; 89(4):835-40. PubMed ID: 17403808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Value of 3-D CT in classifying acetabular fractures during orthopedic residency training.
Garrett J; Halvorson J; Carroll E; Webb LX
Orthopedics; 2012 May; 35(5):e615-20. PubMed ID: 22588400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Computer-aided planning of reconstructive surgery of the innominate bone: automated correction proposals.
Gelaude F; Clijmans T; Broos PL; Lauwers B; Vander Sloten J
Comput Aided Surg; 2007 Sep; 12(5):286-94. PubMed ID: 17957536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Rapid prototyping in the assessment, classification and preoperative planning of acetabular fractures.
Hurson C; Tansey A; O'Donnchadha B; Nicholson P; Rice J; McElwain J
Injury; 2007 Oct; 38(10):1158-62. PubMed ID: 17884058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Measurement of acetabular version based on biplanar radiographs with 3D reconstructions in comparison to CT as reference standard in cadavers.
Agten CA; Jonczy M; Ullrich O; Pfirrmann CWA; Sutter R; Buck FM
Clin Anat; 2017 Jul; 30(5):591-598. PubMed ID: 28295578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Reliability of acetabular bone defect classification systems in revision total hip arthroplasty.
Campbell DG; Garbuz DS; Masri BA; Duncan CP
J Arthroplasty; 2001 Jan; 16(1):83-6. PubMed ID: 11172275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Pre-operative evaluation for uncemented hip arthroplasty. The role of computerised tomography.
Dias JJ; Johnson GV; Finlay DB; Stoyle TF
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 1989 Jan; 71(1):43-6. PubMed ID: 2915003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Utility of Radiographs, Computed Tomography, and Three Dimensional Computed Tomography Pelvis Reconstruction for Identification of Acetabular Defects in Residency Training.
Plate JF; Shields JS; Langfitt MK; Bolognesi MP; Lang JE; Seyler TM
Hip Pelvis; 2017 Dec; 29(4):247-252. PubMed ID: 29250499
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Preliminary study of bipolar hip prosthesis - influence of acetabular bone interactions on bone morphology.
Pleşea IE; Anuşca D; Bondari S; Pop OT; Poenaru F; Dascălu V; Ghiluşi M
Rom J Morphol Embryol; 2011; 52(1 Suppl):273-82. PubMed ID: 21424064
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
