These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

167 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 14982342)

  • 1. Assessment of cement introduction and pressurization techniques.
    Dunne NJ; Orr JF; Beverland DE
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2004; 218(1):11-25. PubMed ID: 14982342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. An in-vitro investigation into the cement pressurization achieved during insertion of four different femoral stems.
    Gozzard C; Gheduzzi S; Miles AW; Learmonth ID
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2005 Nov; 219(6):407-13. PubMed ID: 16312100
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: a comparison of 3 systems.
    Munro NA; Nicol M; Selvaraj S; Hussain SM; Finlayson DF
    J Arthroplasty; 2007 Sep; 22(6):893-901. PubMed ID: 17826282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Enhancing proximal femoral pressure during cemented stem insertion.
    Budnar VM; Bannister GC
    Hip Int; 2012; 22(3):302-6. PubMed ID: 22740281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: a laboratory comparison of three techniques.
    Kapoor B; Datir SP; Davis B; Wynn-Jones CH; Maffulli N
    Acta Orthop Scand; 2004 Dec; 75(6):708-12. PubMed ID: 15762260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Timing of femoral prosthesis insertion during cemented arthroplasty: cement curing and static mechanical strength in an in vivo model.
    Hunt S; Stone C; Seal S
    Can J Surg; 2011 Feb; 54(1):33-8. PubMed ID: 21251430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. CT analysis of defects of the cement mantle and alignment of the stem: in vitro comparison of Charnley-Kerboul femoral hip implants inserted line-to-line and undersized in paired femora.
    Scheerlinck T; de Mey J; Deklerck R; Noble PC
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2006 Jan; 88(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 16365114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effect of undersizing on the long-term stability of the Exeter hip stem: A comparative in vitro study.
    Cristofolini L; Erani P; Bialoblocka-Juszczyk E; Ohashi H; Iida S; Minato I; Viceconti M
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2010 Nov; 25(9):899-908. PubMed ID: 20659780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The influence of stem insertion rate on the porosity of the cement mantle of hip joint replacements.
    Baleani M; Fognani R; Toni A
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2003; 217(3):199-205. PubMed ID: 12807160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Development of a computer model to predict pressure generation around hip replacement stems.
    Dunne NJ; Orr JF
    Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2000; 214(6):645-58. PubMed ID: 11201412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Femoral stem insertion generates high bone cement pressurization.
    Churchill DL; Incavo SJ; Uroskie JA; Beynnon BD
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2001 Dec; (393):335-44. PubMed ID: 11764367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. In vitro and in vivo studies of pressurization of femoral cement in total hip arthroplasty.
    Davies JP; Harris WH
    J Arthroplasty; 1993 Dec; 8(6):585-91. PubMed ID: 8301275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of 2 modern femoral cementing techniques: analysis by cement-bone interface pressure measurements, computerized image analysis, and static mechanical testing.
    Reading AD; McCaskie AW; Barnes MR; Gregg PJ
    J Arthroplasty; 2000 Jun; 15(4):479-87. PubMed ID: 10884209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Does increased cement pressure produce superior femoral component fixation?
    Dozier JK; Harrigan T; Kurtz WH; Hawkins C; Hill R
    J Arthroplasty; 2000 Jun; 15(4):488-95. PubMed ID: 10884210
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The influence of cementing technique in hip resurfacing arthroplasty on the initial stability of the femoral component.
    Bitsch RG; Jäger S; Lürssen M; Loidolt T; Schmalzried TP; Weiss S
    Int Orthop; 2011 Dec; 35(12):1759-65. PubMed ID: 21298433
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quantification of stem-cement interfacial gaps: in vitro CT analysis of Charnley-Kerboul and Lubinus SPII femoral hip implants.
    Scheerlinck T; Vandenbussche P; Noble PC; Dunn JS
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2008 Jan; 90(1):107-13. PubMed ID: 18160511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Influence of bone density on the cement fixation of femoral hip resurfacing components.
    Bitsch RG; Jäger S; Lürssen M; Loidolt T; Schmalzried TP; Clarius M
    J Orthop Res; 2010 Aug; 28(8):986-91. PubMed ID: 20162694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Thin cement mantles surrounding femoral hip implants might not be deleterious in all cases.
    Scheerlinck T; Janssen D; Verdonschot N
    Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2008 May; 23(4):500-1; author reply 501-3. PubMed ID: 18207616
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The cement mantle of femoral hip implants is more influenced by stem-broach sizing than by shape: an in vitro CT analysis of straight Charnley-Kerboul and anatomic Lubinus SPII stems.
    Scheerlinck T; de Mey J; Deklerck R
    Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2009 Nov; 129(11):1473-81. PubMed ID: 19198861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.