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 *

472 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16950035)

  • 1. Using intraoperative pelvic landmarks for acetabular component placement in total hip arthroplasty.
    Sotereanos NG; Miller MC; Smith B; Hube R; Sewecke JJ; Wohlrab D
    J Arthroplasty; 2006 Sep; 21(6):832-40. PubMed ID: 16950035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: the effect of orientation of the acetabular component.
    Biedermann R; Tonin A; Krismer M; Rachbauer F; Eibl G; Stöckl B
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2005 Jun; 87(6):762-9. PubMed ID: 15911655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Resolving inconsistencies in defining the target orientation for the acetabular cup angles in total hip arthroplasty.
    Yoon YS; Hodgson AJ; Tonetti J; Masri BA; Duncan CP
    Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2008 Mar; 23(3):253-9. PubMed ID: 18069102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Assessment of accuracy of acetabular cup orientation in CT-free navigated total hip arthroplasty.
    Fukunishi S; Fukui T; Imamura F; Nishio S
    Orthopedics; 2008 Oct; 31(10):. PubMed ID: 19226017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Primary total hip arthroplasty with a flattened press-fit acetabular component in osteoarthritis and inflammatory arthritis: a prospective study on 416 hips with 6-10 years follow-up.
    Zwartelé RE; Olsthoorn PG; Pöll RG; Brand R; Doets HC
    Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2008 Dec; 128(12):1379-86. PubMed ID: 18758793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Validation of a computer navigation system and a CT method for determination of the orientation of implanted acetabular cup in total hip arthroplasty: a cadaver study.
    Lin F; Lim D; Wixson RL; Milos S; Hendrix RW; Makhsous M
    Clin Biomech (Bristol); 2008 Oct; 23(8):1004-11. PubMed ID: 18541352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The transverse acetabular ligament: optimizing version.
    Beverland D
    Orthopedics; 2010 Sep; 33(9):631. PubMed ID: 20839699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Early primary total hip arthroplasty for acetabular fractures in elderly patients].
    Simko P; Braunsteiner T; Vajcziková S
    Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech; 2006 Aug; 73(4):275-82. PubMed ID: 17026887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A novel acetabular alignment guide for THR using selective anatomic landmarks on the pelvis.
    DeChenne CL; Jayaram U; Lovell T; Dong N; Cusick M
    J Biomech; 2005 Sep; 38(9):1902-8. PubMed ID: 16023479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The combined anteversion technique for acetabular component anteversion.
    Amuwa C; Dorr LD
    J Arthroplasty; 2008 Oct; 23(7):1068-70. PubMed ID: 18534533
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [Comparison of the acetabular orientation after minimally-invasive total hip arthroplasty with and without computer-navigation: a clinical report of 106 hip in 87 patients].
    Guo XZ; Dou BX; Liu Q; Huang Y; Zhou YX
    Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2007 Sep; 87(35):2489-93. PubMed ID: 18067812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Error in acetabular socket alignment due to the thick anterior pelvic soft tissues.
    Lee YS; Yoon TR
    J Arthroplasty; 2008 Aug; 23(5):699-706. PubMed ID: 18534380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Evaluation of component positioning in primary total hip arthroplasty using an imageless navigation device compared with traditional methods.
    Najarian BC; Kilgore JE; Markel DC
    J Arthroplasty; 2009 Jan; 24(1):15-21. PubMed ID: 18534411
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Research progress on positioning accuracy of acetabulum prosthesis].
    Liu J; Deng J
    Zhongguo Gu Shang; 2016 Aug; 29(8):770-773. PubMed ID: 29282941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Comparison of conventional versus computer-navigated acetabular component insertion.
    Haaker RG; Tiedjen K; Ottersbach A; Rubenthaler F; Stockheim M; Stiehl JB
    J Arthroplasty; 2007 Feb; 22(2):151-9. PubMed ID: 17275626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Acetabular component positioning using anatomic landmarks of the acetabulum.
    Ha YC; Yoo JJ; Lee YK; Kim JY; Koo KH
    Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2012 Dec; 470(12):3515-23. PubMed ID: 22777589
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: the influence of malpositioning of the components.
    De Haan R; Campbell PA; Su EP; De Smet KA
    J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2008 Sep; 90(9):1158-63. PubMed ID: 18757954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Implant position calculation for acetabular cup placement considering pelvic lateral tilt and inclination.
    Chen E; Goertz W; Lill CA
    Comput Aided Surg; 2006 Nov; 11(6):309-16. PubMed ID: 17458765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Periprosthetic acetabular bone loss using a constrained acetabular component.
    Ito H; Matsuno T
    Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2004 Mar; 124(2):137-9. PubMed ID: 14652779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Acetabular alignment and primary arc of motion for minus, skirtless, and skirted 28-, 32-, 36-, and 40-mm femoral heads.
    Kosashvili Y; Omoto D; Backstein D; Safir O; Lakstein D; Gross AE
    J Arthroplasty; 2013 Feb; 28(2):279-285.e2. PubMed ID: 22854347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 24.