197 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14630471)
1. The relationship between cement fatigue damage and implant surface finish in proximal femoral prostheses.
Lennon AB; McCormack BA; Prendergast PJ
Med Eng Phys; 2003 Dec; 25(10):833-41. PubMed ID: 14630471
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Surface roughness of debonded straight-tapered stems in cemented THA reduces subsidence but not cement damage.
Verdonschot N; Huiskes R
Biomaterials; 1998 Oct; 19(19):1773-9. PubMed ID: 9856588
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of cement stresses in finite element analyses of cemented orthopaedic implants.
Lennon AB; Prendergast PJ
J Biomech Eng; 2001 Dec; 123(6):623-8. PubMed ID: 11783734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effects of prosthesis surface roughness on the failure process of cemented hip implants after stem-cement debonding.
Verdonschot N; Tanck E; Huiskes R
J Biomed Mater Res; 1998 Dec; 42(4):554-9. PubMed ID: 9827679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The influence of cement mantle thickness and stem geometry on fatigue damage in two different cemented hip femoral prostheses.
Ramos A; Simões JA
J Biomech; 2009 Nov; 42(15):2602-10. PubMed ID: 19660758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The skeletal response to matt and polished cemented femoral stems.
Barker DS; Wang AW; Yeo MF; Nawana NS; Brumby SA; Pearcy MJ; Howie DW
J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2000 Nov; 82(8):1182-8. PubMed ID: 11132284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cement mantle fatigue failure in total hip replacement: experimental and computational testing.
Jeffers JR; Browne M; Lennon AB; Prendergast PJ; Taylor M
J Biomech; 2007; 40(7):1525-33. PubMed ID: 17070816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effects of design changes on cemented tapered femoral stem fixation.
Middleton RG; Howie DW; Costi K; Sharpe P
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 1998 Oct; (355):47-56. PubMed ID: 9917590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Stem surface roughness alters creep induced subsidence and 'taper-lock' in a cemented femoral hip prosthesis.
Norman TL; Thyagarajan G; Saligrama VC; Gruen TA; Blaha JD
J Biomech; 2001 Oct; 34(10):1325-33. PubMed ID: 11522312
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. In-vitro characteristics of cemented titanium femoral stems with a smooth surface finish.
Akiyama H; Yamamoto K; Kaneuji A; Matsumoto T; Nakamura T
J Orthop Sci; 2013 Jan; 18(1):29-37. PubMed ID: 22945910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Influence of proximal stem geometry and stem-cement interface characteristics on bone and cement stresses in femoral hip arthroplasty: finite element analysis].
Massin P; Astoin E; Lavaste F
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot; 2003 Apr; 89(2):134-43. PubMed ID: 12844057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Initial stability of cemented femoral stems as a function of surface finish, collar, and stem size.
Ebramzadeh E; Sangiorgio SN; Longjohn DB; Buhari CF; Dorr LD
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2004 Jan; 86(1):106-15. PubMed ID: 14711952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Microdamage accumulation in the cement layer of hip replacements under flexural loading.
McCormack BA; Prendergast PJ
J Biomech; 1999 May; 32(5):467-75. PubMed ID: 10327000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Challenges in relating experimental hip implant fixation predictions to clinical observations.
Sangiorgio SN; Longjohn DB; Dorr LD; Ebramzadeh E
J Biomech; 2011 Jan; 44(2):235-43. PubMed ID: 21040920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Total hip arthroplasty with a cemented, polished, collared femoral stem and a cementless acetabular component. A follow-up study at a minimum of ten years.
Firestone DE; Callaghan JJ; Liu SS; Goetz DD; Sullivan PM; Vittetoe DA; Johnston RC
J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2007 Jan; 89(1):126-32. PubMed ID: 17200319
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Polished Cemented Femoral Stems Have a Lower Rate of Revision Than Matt Finished Cemented Stems in Total Hip Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 96,315 Cemented Femoral Stems.
Hoskins W; van Bavel D; Lorimer M; de Steiger RN
J Arthroplasty; 2018 May; 33(5):1472-1476. PubMed ID: 29310918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The influence of proximal stem geometry and surface finish on the fixation of a double-tapered cemented femoral stem.
Sangiorgio SN; Longjohn DB; Dorr LD; Ebramzadeh E
J Biomech; 2011 Jan; 44(1):22-7. PubMed ID: 20828697
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. In vitro comparison of the effects of rough and polished stem surface finish on pressure generation in cemented hip arthroplasty.
Bartlett GE; Beard DJ; Murray DW; Gill HS
Acta Orthop; 2009 Apr; 80(2):144-9. PubMed ID: 19404793
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Modelling the fibrous tissue layer in cemented hip replacements: experimental and finite element methods.
Waide V; Cristofolini L; Stolk J; Verdonschot N; Boogaard GJ; Toni A
J Biomech; 2004 Jan; 37(1):13-26. PubMed ID: 14672564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A rough surface finish adversely affects the survivorship of a cemented femoral stem.
Della Valle AG; Zoppi A; Peterson MG; Salvati EA
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2005 Jul; (436):158-63. PubMed ID: 15995435
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
